napier significant natural areas assessment - new …...napier significant natural areas assessment...
TRANSCRIPT
Napier Significant Natural Areas Assessment
T.S. Cornes, C.L. Kirby, R.L. Johnson, B.D. Clarkson
ERI Report number: 124
Prepared for Napier City Council
Environmental Research Institute
University of Waikato
September 2019
1
Contents Executive summary .................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4
Policy and planning context ............................................................................................................ 4 Napier City ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Climate ............................................................................................................................................ 5 Geology and soils ............................................................................................................................ 6 Napier City landforms ..................................................................................................................... 7 Historic indigenous vegetation types.............................................................................................. 8 Fauna ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 10 Identification of potential sites ..................................................................................................... 10 Field assessment of significance ................................................................................................... 10
General information .................................................................................................................. 11 Site description ......................................................................................................................... 11 Habitat and vegetation description .......................................................................................... 11 Flora and fauna ......................................................................................................................... 12 Threats ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Human associated activities ...................................................................................................... 13 Management recommendations .............................................................................................. 13 Limitations ................................................................................................................................. 13
Ecological restoration and connectivity opportunities ................................................................. 14 Results ................................................................................................................................... 14
Extent of Napier SNAs ................................................................................................................... 14 Significance scales ......................................................................................................................... 15 Spatial distribution of SNAs .......................................................................................................... 15 Extent of Napier SNAs by landform .............................................................................................. 17 Analysis of representativeness ..................................................................................................... 17 Vegetation of Napier SNAs ........................................................................................................... 18 Fauna ............................................................................................................................................. 18
Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 19 Significance of natural areas in Napier ......................................................................................... 19 Napier’s SNA ecosystems .............................................................................................................. 19 Missing and poorly-represented ecosystems ............................................................................... 20 Significant natural areas and restoration targets ......................................................................... 22 Ecological restoration and connectivity opportunities ................................................................. 22
Conclusion and recommendations .......................................................................................... 24 References .................................................................................................................................... 25 Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 28 Appendix 1: SNA – Site assessment form ..................................................................................... 29 Appendix 2: Summary table of Napier significant natural areas .................................................. 34 Appendix 3: Flora species from surveys, literature and landowner information ......................... 39 Appendix 4: Fauna species from surveys, literature and landowner information ....................... 46 Appendix 5: Methods for conducting terrestrial ecological restoration/reconstruction ............. 49
2
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge Melissa Collins, Gemma Collins, staff from Napier City Council,
Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, the Department of Conservation and NZ Landcare Trust as well as
private landowners for their assistance in the preparation of this report. Geoff Walls, Bev Clarkson and
Kiri Wallace kindly reviewed the report and made numerous helpful suggestions. Any errors or
omissions remain the responsibility of the authors.
Reviewed by:
Kiri Joy Wallace
Postdoctoral Fellow
Environmental Research Institute
University of Waikato
Approved for release by:
John Tyrrell Business Manager Environmental Research Institute University of Waikato
Reviewed by:
Geoff Walls
Ecologist
Taramoa Limited
Reviewed by:
Bev Clarkson Wetland Ecologist Manaaki Whenua,
Landcare Research
3
Executive summary Napier City Council (NCC) contracted the University of Waikato’s Environmental Research Institute
(ERI) in early 2019 to identify areas of significant indigenous vegetation, habitats of indigenous fauna
and/or ecologically significant wetlands (hereafter referred as significant natural areas – SNAs) within
Napier City boundaries. SNA identification aligns with the NCC District Plan review, NCC’s
responsibilities under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the Hawke’s Bay Resource
Management Plan (including Regional Policy Statement (RPS)), and the direction provided by the draft
National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB). Identification of SNAs provides an
opportunity for strategic ecological management and restoration of indigenous ecosystems in
biodiversity depleted landscapes.
Surveys of potential significant natural areas were conducted during February 26th to March 4th, 2019
by an ERI terrestrial ecology team. Each site was assessed for habitat representativeness and pattern,
indigenous species diversity, rarity and distinctiveness, and ecological context. These criteria are based
on guidance from the draft NPSIB Appendix 1 and previous SNA assessments in New Zealand. The
criteria were considered at both an ecological district scale (as specified by the draft NPSIB) and a city
scale. The survey employed standard methodology focused on vegetation types and likely habitat for
indigenous fauna.
In total, 32 SNAs that met the criteria for ecological significance were identified out of 52 surveyed
sites. Fourteen sites met these criteria at an ecological district scale and 18 met the criteria at a city
scale. The total area of the 32 Napier SNAs was 628.8 hectares, the median SNA area was 1.5 hectares
and 96.7% of the SNA area was represented by sites of significance at an ecological district scale.
Significant natural areas were distributed unevenly across the city and landform types. Most SNAs
were located on hills or saline plains. Less than 1% of the coastal margin and plains were identified as
SNAs and urban Napier City had very few SNAs.
This survey identified 5.94% of Napier City Council land area as SNAs. This proportion includes saline
plain SNAs, which exist outside of the built-up matrix of urban Napier. Both scientific research and the
draft NPSIB indicate that at least 10% of indigenous habitat is required in biodiversity depleted
environments to avoid an accelerating rate of biodiversity loss and local extinctions.
It is recommended that management resources be directed towards the legal protection of existing
SNAs, the restoration and reconstruction of missing and poorly represented local ecosystems and the
linking of SNAs across Napier to ensure ecosystem buffering and ecological connectivity. Protection
and restoration priorities should be focused on the sites that are significant at an ecological district
scale but it is also important to protect and restore those that are significant at a city scale. These
goals should be focused on improving ecological integrity and may be planned best through the
development of a Napier City biodiversity strategy.
4
Introduction
Policy and planning context
In early 2019 the University of Waikato’s ERI was contracted by Napier City Council (NCC) to identify
areas of significant indigenous vegetation, habitats of indigenous fauna and/or ecologically significant
wetlands (hereafter referred as significant natural areas – SNAs) within Napier City boundaries.
During this period, NCC was in the early stages of a full District Plan review, which provided an
opportunity to consider protection options for SNAs under the revised Napier District Plan. The Napier
District Plan review also provided the opportunity to recommend possible ecological restoration
targets to promote the recovery of indigenous ecosystems that have been degraded, damaged or
destroyed.
Identifying Napier SNAs also fulfils part of Napier City Council’s obligation under the Resource
Management Act 1991 (RMA) Section 6, which includes:
● The preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment (including the coastal
marine area), wetlands, and lakes and rivers and their margins, and the protection of them
from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development S6(a),
● Recognising and providing for the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and
significant habitats of indigenous fauna S6(c), and
● Having particular regard to the intrinsic value of ecosystems S7(d), and the responsibility for
the maintenance of indigenous biodiversity S31(1).
SNA identification achieves RPS objectives for implementing the RMA in the Hawke’s Bay region,
including Objective 15: the preservation and enhancement of remaining areas of significant
indigenous vegetation, significant habitats of indigenous fauna and ecologically significant wetlands.
The recent release of the draft NPSIB indicates new requirements, methods and recommendations
such as:
● Standardised criteria for the identification of SNAs,
● A target of minimum 10% indigenous vegetation cover in biodiversity depleted environments
to prevent biodiversity loss, and
● Opportunities to incentivise restoration or enhancement of areas that provide important
connectivity or buffering functions and of indigenous biodiversity depleted environments.
Separate to this report, NCC commissioned mana whenua to identify locally indigenous species and
ecosystems that are taonga. This work will enable Council to develop objectives, policies, and methods
to protect values of identified taonga where appropriate.
Napier City Council also separately commissioned a landscape study to:
● Describe and evaluate Napier’s landscapes,
● Identify any outstanding natural features and landscapes, special character landscapes, or
areas of outstanding or high natural character, and
● Recommend measures for the District Plan based on identification of potential threats to
landscape values (valued characteristics and qualities), capacity to accommodate different
land uses, and opportunities to enhance such values.
5
Napier City
Napier City (Figure 1) is located on the east coast of New Zealand’s North Island in the Hawke’s Bay
region and borders the Hastings District Council. It lies within the Heretaunga plains and has a total
territorial area of 10582 hectares. The City is within the Heretaunga Ecological District (Lee 1994).
Figure 1. Napier City Council territory. Heretaunga Ecological District (orange) shown in inset.
Climate
The climate of Hawke’s Bay is influenced largely by the orography and airstreams crossing New
Zealand. The area experiences variable and sporadic rainfall, as well as large and occasionally sudden
temperature fluctuations. Hawke’s Bay receives less than 800 mm annual rainfall and is regularly
prone to drought. Much of the region’s rainfall occurs when wind directions are primarily easterly or
6
southerly. The region is less windy than many other coastal areas of New Zealand and as a result, a
large number of frosts occur during the cooler months of the year, especially in inland areas. Hawke’s
Bay receives 2200+ sunshine hours annually and its average annual temperature range is 3°C to 23°C
(Ministry of Works 1971; Chappell 2013).
Napier city encompasses two bioclimatic zones. The coastal zone extends to 5 km from the sea and
has a strong maritime influence. Inland, the lowland arid zone has extreme moisture deficits during
the growing season (Lee 1994).
Geology and soils
The geology of the Heretaunga Plains is dominated by Late Quaternary alluvial and marine sediments
overlying older Quaternary sediments that in turn overlie Pliocene mudstone, sandstone and
limestone (Lee et al. 2011).
Four soil types are found within Napier City; raw (29% of the city), recent (18%), gley (6%) and pallic
(21%) Other areas of the city were classed as river (1%), built-up urban (23%) or without soil (2%)
(Newsome, Wilde and Willoughby 2000; Hewitt 1998).
Raw soils are the youngest type and do not have a distinct top soil due to active deposition. These
soils are found on the coastal strip, plains and saline plains. They range from gravels deposited by the
sea along the northern part of the coast to areas of periodic or permanent flooding around the saline
plains and part of the plains.
Recent soils are young soils with a distinct top soil. These have also derived from materials deposited
by the rivers and flooding but have had longer to develop than the raw soils. These occur from alluvial
sand deposits in the north, poorly drained areas of the plains, and deposits from flowing water on the
lower part of hills.
Gley soils found in Napier are all recent gley soils. These are poorly drained soils exposed to prolonged
periods of saturation and are prone to flooding. They are derived from alluvial material and are less
than 60cm from the mineral soil surface. These are found in the south-eastern part of the city.
Pallic soils are well developed soils with topsoil (A horizon) and a B horizon. They are drought prone
in summer and have a moderate to high base content. This soil type is common on the seasonally dry
areas of the North Island’s east coast. The majority of pallic soils are found on the hills. The hills were
mostly perched gley pallic soils both with and without pans but with an argillic horizon. These are
periodically saturated in winter and spring. The Esk Hills and the south west hills of Napier have
immature pallic soils without duripans or argillic horizons. Two types of pallic soils were found on the
plains. The perched gley pallic soil, which was also found on the hills, and the clay-enriched B horizon
argillic pallic soil only found on the plains.
7
Napier City landforms
Napier City comprises four main landform types: coastal margin, saline plain, plain and hills. The city
is bordered by Esk River in the north and Tutaekuri in the south (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Landforms of Napier City.
The coastal margin is delineated by a 150 metre margin along the eastern coastline. This area contains
the gravel beaches and back-beaches of the city. Whilst raw gravel soils are present, much of the
landform is without a true soil type (Newsome, Wilde and Willoughby 2000).
8
Saline plains are the result of the 1931 Napier Earthquake and are the uplifted remnants of the former
Ahuriri Lagoon (Madarasz-Smith 2014). The groundwater of this landform type continues to be tidally
influenced (Daly and Rijkse 1976). The majority of this landform is not part of the built-up urban
matrix.
Plains were formed from Quaternary deposits during the last 250,000 years by river sediments,
estuarine and embayment deposits (Dravid and Brown 1997).
Hills in the area belong mostly to the late Miocene - early Pleistocene Mangaheia rock group with
some hills also having rock belonging to the middle Pleistocene kidnappers group (Bland and Kamp
2014).
Historic indigenous vegetation types
The indigenous vegetation of Napier City has been almost completely removed for agricultural and
urban development and limited information is available on historic species assemblages or
distribution. Furthermore, uplift from the 1931 earthquake significantly changed the Napier landscape
and as a result, large areas of the current plains have no historic vegetation type. The following historic
vegetation types were developed from broad scale vegetation studies in the Hawke’s Bay and studies
of similar landforms in neighbouring districts. This information takes into account current climate, soils
and landforms:
Coastal forests dominated the hills and drier area of the plains, in some areas they extended to the
coastline. These were dominated by a mosaic of native trees such as tōtara (Podocarpus totara), tawa
(Beilschmiedia tawa), māhoe (Melicytus ramiflorus), māpou (Myrsine australis), nīkau (Rhopalostylis
sapida), ngaio (Myoporum laetum), wharangi (Melicope ternata), akeake (Dodonaea viscosa) and
tītoki (Alectryon excelsus). In disturbed areas (e.g. post-fire), native grasses, bracken (Pteridium
esculentum), mānuka (Leptospermum scoparium) and kānuka (Kunzea robusta) were the main
colonisers (Yule 1958; Grant 1996; Clarkson and Clarkson 1991; Lee 1994; Whaley et al. 2002;
Leathwick et al. 2017).
Swamp and semi-swamp forests were present on alluvial and flood plain areas as well as gullies and
poorly-drained hillslopes. These areas had naturally higher soil water content and nutrient levels.
Dominant species would have included kahikatea (Dacrycarpus dacrydioides), mataī (Prumnopitys
taxifolia), rimu (Dacrydium cupressinum), cabbage tree (Cordyline australis), tōtara (Podocarpus
totara), pukatea (Laurelia novae-zelandiae) and occasional tawa. In disturbed areas of forest,
kahikatea, mānuka and raupō (Typha orientalis) were early colonisers (Yule 1958; Clarkson and
Clarkson 1991; Whaley et al. 2002; Leathwick et al. 2017).
Freshwater wetlands were found in the poorest drained areas and margins of lakes and streams. These
had an array of species including dwarf rush (Juncus novae-zelandiae), grass-leaved rush (Juncus
planifolius), Māori sedge (Carex maorica), pūrei (Carex secta), giant umbrella sedge (Cyperus
ustulatus), swamp kiokio (Blechnum minus), toetoe (Austroderia toetoe), burr-reed (Sparganium
subglobosum), kūkuta (Eleocharis sphacelata), raupō (Typha orientalis), mānuka and extensive
harakeke (Phormium tenax). Swamp forests were found on the margins of herbaceous wetlands (Yule
1958; Grant 1996; Clarkson and Clarkson 1991; Whaley et al. 2002).
Saline wetlands were present at the head of estuarine systems, a mix of salt marshes and salt
meadows. These gave way to raupō and harakeke dominated freshwater wetlands. Salt marshes were
often supported by sea rush (Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis) and other rush-like plant colonies.
Salt meadows existed in drier estuarine areas, supported by turf plants like glasswort (Salicornia
9
quinqueflora) and herbs remuremu (Selliera radicans) and māakoako (Samolus repens) (Clarkson and
Clarkson 1991; NZPCN 2012). After the Napier earthquake, these vegetation types expanded into the
new landscape.
Coastal vegetation was found on sand dunes, gravel beaches, plains or coastal cliffs. Coastal forests
probably included tōtara, mataī, ngaio, Olearia paniculata (akiraho), akeake, kānuka, māpou, nīkau,
tītoki and other native trees capable of tolerating wind, salt air and sand or gravel substrates (Geoff
Walls pers. comms. 2019). The foredunes were dominated by spinifex (Spinifex sericeus) and pīngao
(Ficinia spiralis) and transitioned to raised beaches dominated by herbfields and low wind-shaped
shrubland. This shrubland would have also extended up the steeper coastal cliffs along with toetoe
(Austroderia fulvida) (Clarkson and Clarkson 1991; Whaley et al. 2002).
Fauna
The Ahuriri Estuary (Te Whanganui a Orotū) provides critical habitat for many native and non-native
fauna species (White 2004). The estuary supports over 70 species of waterbirds, 17 of which are
migratory. Bird species of particular note, listed in order of their conservation status (Robertson et al.
2017; HBRC 2018), include:
Australasian bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) - Nationally Critical
Black-billed gull (Chroicocephalus bulleri) - Nationally Critical
Reef heron (Egretta sacra) - Nationally Endangered
Wrybill (Anarhynchus frontalis) - Nationally Vulnerable
Banded dotterel (Charadrius bicinctus) - Nationally Vulnerable
Caspian tern (Hydroprogne caspia) - Nationally Vulnerable
Bar-tailed godwit (Limosa lapponica) - Declining
Marsh crake (Porzana pusilla) - Declining
New Zealand dabchick (Poliocephalus rufopectus) - Recovering
Black-fronted dotterel (Elseyornis melanops) - Naturally Uncommon
Royal spoonbill (Platalea regia) - Naturally Uncommon
Invertebrate sampling recorded 33 species in the Ahuriri Estuary and approximately 29 species of fish
that are supported by the estuary at some stage of their life cycle (HBRC 2018). In a ranking of native
fish values using the River Values Assessment System (RiVAS) system, the Napier coast was ranked as
being of ‘Local significance’ (Hughey et al. 2012) while the rest of the Hawke’s Bay coast was ranked
as being of ‘Regional significance’. The pest species mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis) and tubeworm
(Ficopomatus enigmaticus) are known to be present in Ahuriri Estuary (HBRC 2018).
Outside of the Ahuriri Estuary, there is limited literature on the fauna of Napier City. The New Zealand
garden bird survey found a common suite of garden birds in the Hawke’s Bay region including
blackbird (Turdus merula), fantail (Rhipidura fuliginosa), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), myna
(Acridotheres tristis), silvereye (Zosterops lateralis), song thrush (Turdus philomelos), tūī
(Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae), bellbird (Anthornis melanura), chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs),
dunnock (Prunella modularis), goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis), magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen) and
starling (Sturnus vulgaris) (Spurr 2012). Kererū (Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae), grey warblers
(Gerygone igata), welcome swallows (Hirundo neoxena), greenfinch (Carduelis chloris) and kingfishers
(Halcyon sancta) have also been recorded on Napier Hill (MacLeod et al. 2015). Kārearea and kākā
occasionally visit in winter (Geoff Walls pers. comm. 2019).
10
The area of Napier City is known to host the usual suite of pest animals (possums, mustelids and
rodents) as well as goats and livestock in agricultural areas (HBRC 2014; MacLeod et al. 2015; various
landowners pers. comms. 2019; Raúl Johnson pers. obs. 2019). Leopard seals (Hydrurga leptonyx)
occasionally visit the Napier coastline for short periods (NZ Herald 2019) and Weddell seals
(Leptonychotes weddellii) have been sighted in 2007 and 2018 (Stuff 2018). The Department of
Conservation lists the common skink (Oligosoma polychroma) and spotted skink (Oligosoma
lineoocellatum) as being present in the Napier region (DOC 2019).
Methodology
Identification of potential sites
The methodology used was a standard rapid reconnaissance survey based on the New Zealand
Protected Natural Areas Programme (Myers, Park and Overmars 1987; Lee 1994). Sites for significant
natural area assessment within Napier City boundaries were initially identified through a desktop
exercise. This involved Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping and analysis, satellite image
analysis, a literature review and consultation with Napier City Council, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
and Department of Conservation staff. The potential SNA sites were selected using layers from the
Land Cover Database version 4.1, Mainland New Zealand (Landcare Research 2015), Ecosystem
Prioritization Dataset (Leathwick, Hashiba and Lynch 2017) and ortho-rectified satellite images (Land
Information New Zealand 2018). Within the city, 52 potential SNA sites were selected to be field-
assessed, based on vegetation cover and fauna habitat.
Field assessment of significance
Site visits were conducted between February 26th and March 4th, 2019. Where possible, site
assessments were complemented by conversations with landowners, city and regional council staff,
and conservation practitioners/coordinators. The 52 sites identified in the desktop exercise were
assessed against significance criteria (habitat representativeness and pattern, indigenous species
diversity, rarity and distinctiveness, and ecological context - see Appendix 1) at two different scales:
1. Ecological district scale. Based on the criteria in the draft National Policy Statement for
Indigenous Biodiversity: draft NPSIB Appendix 1: Criteria for identifying significant natural
areas in accordance with Policy 4. The draft NPSIB states that the spatial frameworks for
assessment of significance (in terrestrial settings) are ecological districts or land
environments.
McEwen (1987) provides the following definition of an ecological district:
“The definition of an ecological district depends on a thorough consideration of the
topography, geology, climate, soils, vegetation and man-induced modifications of the area
(Nicholls 1979). Thus an ecological district is a local part of New Zealand where the
topographical, geological, climatic, soil and biological features, including the broad cultural
pattern, produce a characteristic landscape and range of biological communities (Park et al.
1983).”
11
2. City scale. Assessment of significance using the same criteria as above but at the scale of
Napier City Council’s territory. These do not qualify for the draft NPSIB criteria because of the
smaller scale but our approach has been guided by the ruling of Judge R. J. Bollard (NZRMA
Decision No. A71/2001) who stated that in determining whether an area of indigenous
vegetation or a habitat of indigenous fauna is significant, the area or habitat “is not required
of itself, or in combination with other areas or habitats, to be nationally important. Neither
does its importance have to be regional in character or otherwise exceed the bounds of the
planning district. Rather it is a question of identifying and assessing (with the aid of qualified
advice and assistance) those areas or habitats that are significant within the district as to
require protection.” Another factor Judge Bollard considered important in determining
significance at a district level was the extent to which the biodiversity resource of the district
had already been diminished. Any natural area or habitat in districts with greatly depleted
natural resources would thus increase in importance.
When a site was deemed to meet one or more of the significance criteria at either scale, a full
assessment was undertaken using the significant natural area (SNA) site assessment form (Appendix
1). If no significance criteria were met, the site was disregarded. The key sections of the assessment
form are described below:
General information
General information for SNAs including tenure, protection status, fencing, and matrix land-use.
Site description
Site descriptions included but were not limited to: vegetation condition (canopy, understorey, leaf-
litter), unusual (or common) characteristics, surrounding land use, presence of streams or rivers,
dominant vegetation communities, uncommon species, history of site and landowner’s comments.
Habitat and vegetation description
Habitat and vegetation descriptions were recorded for each individual SNA site. These descriptions,
as explained below, included: site number, hydrological regime, category, code, character, area, and
vegetation description. Criteria for the classification of hydrological regimes are given in Table 1.
Category and code were used to describe the vegetation of the site. Each site was classified into
category A, B, C, or D, which correlate to wooded/treefern habitats (e.g. podocarp forest),
grass/herb/moss habitats (e.g. herbaceous), bare habitats (e.g. rocky coast), and other habitats (e.g.
roads/railways), respectively (Table 2). Character refers to whether the site vegetation is indigenous
or exotic based on an estimate of the abundance of indigenous and exotic species. A proportion of
greater than 50% cover qualifies the site for classification into either one of these categories. The area
of each site was visually estimated. Vegetation descriptions were based on Atkinson (1985) to give an
indication of cover abundance, and presence or absence of tiers. Due to their rarity, in-depth
descriptions were provided for sites with wetland or coastal shore ecosystems.
12
Table 1. Criteria for the classification of hydrological regime.
Code Character Explanation
1 Terrestrial All dry areas of land not covered by a wetland hydroclass (see below)
2 Estuarine Coastal waters semi-enclosed by land and partially diluted with fresh water
3 Riverine Flowing waters contained within a channel: rivers, streams, and their margins.
4 Lacustrine Lakes or dammed rivers with open water
5 Palustrine All other non-tidal wetlands, small open water bodies, and vegetated wet ground.
Table 2. Criteria for the classification of vegetation (modified from Atkinson 1985; Cornes, Thomson, Clarkson 2012).
Code Wooded / Treefern habitats A
Code
Herbaceous habitats B
Code
Bare habitats C
1 Podocarp forest 20 Herbfield wetland 40 Rocky coast
2 Broadleaved forest 21 Flaxland (Phormium) 41 Sand coast, Dunes
3 Beech forest 22 Reedland (Typha) 42 Lagoon
4 Podocarp-broadleaved forest
23 Sedgeland (Cyperaceae) 43 River mouth
5 Podocarp-broadleaved-beech forest
24 Rushland (Juncaceae) 44 River, Riverbed
6 Kānuka–Mānuka forest (Kunzea, Leptospermum)
25 Grassland (Ammophila, Spinifex, Bush rice grass, Poaceae)
45 Lake
7 Exotic forest (Pinus, Eucalyptus)
26 Tall grasses > 1 m (Cortaderia) 46 Pond
8 Deciduous woodland (exotic)
27 Tussockland (Chionochloa) 47 Stream
9 Parkland (spaced plants) 28 Agricultural land (pasture, cropping) 48 Cliff, Bluff, Gorge
10 Wetland forest (pukatea, kahikatea, swamp maire)
29 Saltmarsh (Apodasmia similis, Salicornia quinqueflora, Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis, Cyperus ustulatus)
49 Rockland
11 Shrubland (Olearia, Hebe) 30 Eelgrass meadow (Zostera) 50 Stone/Gravel fields
12 Scrub (regeneration) 31 Algaefield 51 Sand flats
13 Treefern forest (Cyathea, Dicksonia)
32 Cushionfield 52 Mud flats
33 Fernland (Pteridium esculentum) 53 Island
34 Moss and Clubmossfield 54 Peatland
35 Lichenfield Others D
36 Herbfield 60 Roads, railways
61 Urban subdivisions
62 Others
Flora and fauna
Lists of the flora and fauna present at the site were compiled from surveying, literature review and/or
landowner observations. Special note was made of rare, threatened or distinctive species at each site.
Vegetation was described in as much detail as possible, with particular reference to the condition of
each tier.
13
Threats
This section of the survey referred particularly to ecological pest plants (e.g. invasive exotic vines) and
animals (e.g. livestock), which are, or have the potential to become significant threats. For each unit
a ranking of first to fourth was given for the abundance or cover of ground cover weeds, vine weeds,
shrub or tree weeds and animal pests. A ranking of first indicates a very common pest. A ranking of
fourth indicates extremely low abundance, or none present. Dominant species were noted and
comments or suggestions for potential management were given.
Human associated activities
Evidence of human associated activities were recorded and given a rating for impact of the activity,
and for the attitude of the involved parties toward remediation. Activity examples include: rubbish
dumping, drainage, earth works, erosion, top dressing, fire, vegetation clearing, herbicide application,
harvest/vegetation clearing, planting, animal pest control, domestic pets, and fencing. These activities
could have a positive or negative ecological impact. Recommendations for action were given.
Context/nearby site information was recorded if applicable. If this included scrub, forest, or wetland
areas, information about dominant vegetation types, size and the condition was recorded.
Management recommendations
Management recommendations for ecological restoration were provided for each site, based
predominantly on vegetation condition. These recommendations are underpinned by an ecological
successional framework with the use of eco-sourced indigenous plants and high planting densities (see
Appendix 5 for further detail).
Limitations
The assessment of significant natural areas in this survey was based on a rapid reconnaissance level
survey primarily focussed on vegetation communities. Fauna data was recorded where possible from
field observations, literature and land owner information. A more comprehensive fauna survey would
require year-round avian, fish, invertebrate, bat and reptile surveys which was outside the scope of
this contract. Reviewers have suggested that additional coastal systems in particular dunelands and
shingle beaches could meet SNA criteria. In particular, sites just north of the airport (both sides of the
highway), at Bay View, on the Broadbeach immediately south of the Esk River mouth and at Awatoto-
Tutaekuri River mouth. These sites may warrant a more detailed duneland and shingle beach survey,
which was outside the scope of this contract. Neither Lee (1994) nor Partridge (1992) identified any
significant coastal systems in these locations. Variable access to potential SNA sites influenced the
detail of flora and fauna that could be recorded. The accuracy of spatial boundaries and the analysis
of spatial layers were dependant on the source data. Accuracy of these layers was improved with
ground-truthing of sites.
The significance of the Ahuriri Estuary, including the Main Outlet Channel, was assessed in its entirety
due to its strong ecological connectivity. The estuary system was physically visited at six different sites
(Upper Ahuriri Estuary, Lower Ahuriri Estuary, Mid-Ahuriri Estuary, Taipo Stream, Westshore Reserve
ponds and Westshore Reserve wetland) to account for differences in physical characteristics,
surrounding land uses and current/historic management. As a result, six different site sheets that
relate to the Ahuriri Estuary are provided in Appendix 6. The significance of the Esk Hills sites was
assessed separately due to varying land cover between Esk hill sites.
14
Ecological restoration and connectivity opportunities
Following the assessment of significant natural areas, a GIS spatial analysis of Napier City was
performed to highlight areas for potential ecological restoration and indigenous habitat corridor
creation. We assigned a 50 m buffer to delineate viable space for landscape connectivity. To do this
we used multiple GIS layers, including our own generated SNAs and walkways layers as well as
available rivers and waterways layers (Land Information New Zealand database). Small areas of natural
vegetation suffer from edge effects and a 50 m habitat buffer creates the possibility of a more
sustainable internal environment (Norton 2002). A union analysis was performed which joined these
buffered layers with the Land Cover Database version 4.1, Mainland New Zealand (Landcare Research
2015). This Land Cover Database layer excluded rivers, open water and exotic grasslands. This was
called Layer 1.
A new layer was created, which consisted of generated lines between the polygons of Layer 1. The
lines were created by using Generate Near Table followed by an XY to Line. This approach is used to
find the shortest distance between two neighbouring polygons and allows for a continuous link
between patches of vegetation, the waterways and the coast. In some cases redundant lines between
the same polygons existed, which were then manually deleted. This process resulted in generation of
Layer 2 for the next step.
Using Layer 2, a 100 m buffer analysis was then performed to delineate the width of the potential
habitat corridors. This was to give a better idea of the area these corridors would take up on the
landscape. This resulted in creation of Layer 3, which was unioned with Layer 1 and three additional
layers: the Ecosystem Prioritization Dataset (Leathwick, Hashiba and Lynch 2017), the Napier City
Council land dataset, and the Department of Conservation land dataset to create Layer 4.
Finally, a union analysis was conducted to join Layer 4 with the publicly available roads dataset (Land
Information New Zealand) the urban built up area dataset, and the industrial areas of Napier City
dataset (Napier City Council 2019). In the areas where the latter three layers overlapped with Layer 4,
these areas were removed, as they are not viable for corridor restoration. This resulted in a final
‘Eco_connectivity’ Layer provided to the NCC with this report. Polygons in this layer were scored from
1 to 7 to prioritize areas for corridor reconstruction. The score was created by adding together the
number of overlapping layers that were used in creation of Layer 4.
Results
Extent of Napier SNAs
Thirty two sites in Napier City appear to meet the significant natural area criteria at either an ecological
district or city scale. The total area covered by SNAs was 628.76 hectares (Table 3) with a median size
of 1.53 hectares. Significant natural areas comprise approximately 5.94% of the Napier City territory.
A summary of all SNAs is given in Appendix 2 and lists of flora and fauna species recorded during
surveys, recorded in literature, or noted by landowners across all SNAs is provided in Appendix 3 & 4.
15
Table 3. City-wide extent of Napier SNAs.
Total SNA area (ha) 628.76
Mean SNA area (ha) 19.65
Median SNA area (ha) 1.54
Total area of Napier City (ha) 10581.74
City area occupied by SNAs (%) 5.94
Significance scales
Of the 32 SNAs, 14 sites met one or more SNA criteria at an ecological district scale (i.e. draft NPSIB
level). The total area of the 14 sites is 608 hectares which represents 5.75% of Napier City. The
remaining 18 sites met one or more SNA criteria at a city scale. The total area of the city scale sites is
20.8 hectares which represents 0.2% of Napier City (Table 4).
Table 4. Summary of SNA sites assessed at two significance scales.
Significance Ecological district scale City scale Total
Number of sites 14 18 32
Area of sites (ha) 608.0 20.8 628.8
City area occupied by SNAs (%) 5.75 0.20 5.94
Of the 14 sites that met significance criteria at an ecological district scale, one (Ahuriri Estuary) met
nine of the 14 criteria, two (Lake Rotokaramu and Bayview wetland) met three criteria, one (Ahuriri
Plain wetland) met two criteria and ten (Esk Hill 1, Esk Hill 2, Esk Hill 3, Esk Hill 5, Esk Hill 7, Esk Hill 9,
Esk Hill 10, Esk Hill 11, Esk Hill 12, Esplanade herbfield) met one criterion.
Of the 18 sites that were significant at a city scale, nine sites met four or more of the significant natural
area criteria. The remaining nine sites met two or three significance criteria.
Spatial distribution of SNAs
The northern half of Napier City had the largest number and area of SNAs. These were along the Main
Outlet Channel, on the saline plains and in the Esk Hill area. Although the SNAs are spread across the
city from north to south and east to west, large areas of the city had no SNAs within them. As expected,
built-up urban Napier and southern Napier had the least SNAs (Figure 3).
16
Figure 3. Location of SNAs within Napier City.
17
Extent of Napier SNAs by landform
Most SNAs were located in the hills (71%). Saline plain sites however, were the dominant landform by
area (569.45 ha), covering 90.57% of the total surveyed SNAs. In contrast, hill sites covered 8.67% of
the total surveyed area. Coastal margin made up the lowest number of sites and smallest land area
(Table 5).
Table 5. Frequency and extent of Napier SNAs by landform.
Landform Total number of SNA sites
% No. of Sites Area of Sites (ha) % Total SNA Area
Coastal margin 1 3 0.80 0.13
Saline plain 4 13 569.45 90.57
Plain 4 13 4.02 0.64
Hill 23 71 54.49 8.67
TOTAL 32 100 628.76 100
Analysis of representativeness
The largest proportion of SNA cover was on the saline plain which totalled 24.16% of the identified
SNA area. While the plains are the most dominant landform (56.45%), they had the lowest proportion
of SNA cover by area (0.07%). Sites on the hills covered less than 3% and both the cover of SNA sites
on the plains and coastal margin were under 1%. Of the landform types, the plains are the most
dominant landform (56.45%) and coastal margin the least (3.31%) (Table 6).
Table 6. Extent of landforms across Napier City.
Landform Total Landform area (ha)
% City covered by landform
% City area covered by SNAs
% Area of SNA per Landform
Coastal margin 349.87 3.31 0.01 0.23
Saline plain 2357.42 22.28 5.38 24.16
Plain 5973.85 56.45 0.04 0.07
Hill 1900.60 17.96 0.51 2.87
TOTAL 10581.74 100 5.94
18
Vegetation of Napier SNAs
Vegetation types found in this survey were coastal herbfield, salt meadow, salt marsh, freshwater
wetland and native forest such as kānuka forest and mixed broadleaved forest (Table 7). The dominant
vegetation types were either salt meadow/salt marsh or native forest. Only two examples of
freshwater wetland and one of coastal herbfield were recorded.
Table 7. Vegetation types found in Napier City landforms.
Coastal margin Saline plain Plain Hill
Coastal herbfield Salt marsh Mānuka-kānuka forest Mānuka-kānuka forest
Salt meadow Mixed broadleaved forest Mixed broadleaved forest
Freshwater wetland
Threatened plant species found in proposed SNAs, listed in order of their conservation status (de
Lange et al. 2014; 2018):
● Clianthus maximus (kakabeak) - Nationally Critical (planted)
● Lophomyrtus obcordata (rohutu) - Nationally Critical (planted)
● Ricciocarpos natans (liverwort) - Nationally Endangered
● Kunzea robusta (kānuka) - Nationally Vulnerable
● Coprosma acerosa (sand coprosma) - Declining
● Pseudopanax laetus - Declining (planted)
● Ptisana salicina (para, king fern) - Declining (planted)
● Teucridium parvifolium (teucridium) - Declining (planted)
● Carmichaelia williamsii (William’s Broom) - Relict (planted)
● Pseudopanax ferox (fierce lancewood) - Naturally Uncommon (planted)
● Thyridia repens (native musk) - Naturally Uncommon
Of the 11 species in this list, seven had been planted. The only naturally occurring threatened species
recorded were Ricciocarpos natans, Thyridia repens, Kunzea robusta and Coprosma acerosa. Kunzea
robusta has recently been assigned “Nationally Vulnerable” status due to the potential threat of
wholesale dieback from myrtle rust infection. This species was recorded in relatively high abundance,
especially on Esk Hill (Appendix 6).
Fauna
Due to the short-term nature of these surveys no additional indigenous fauna species were seen and
recorded beyond those already listed in available literature. The fauna that were recorded included
water birds that are well-known in the Ahuriri Estuary as well as a common assemblage of native and
exotic urban bird species such as tūī, fantails, blackbirds and sparrows. A list of Napier City fauna from
surveys, landowner information and literature is provided in Appendix 4.
A number of sites were found to be accessible to livestock and in four of the SNAs livestock were
having a detrimental effect on vegetation condition. Control of possums, and in some areas rats, was
19
being undertaken in at least eleven of the SNAs with a notable community-led operation covering the
Esk Hill area.
Discussion
Significance of natural areas in Napier
The 32 significant natural areas in Napier City occupied 628.8 hectares with a median size of 1.5
hectares. Of these 32 SNAs that were identified, 18 met the significance criteria at the city scale.
However, the remaining 14 SNAs that met significance criteria at the ecological district scale
represented a much greater area (608 hectares, 96.7% of total SNA area). This was often due to larger
sites having greater ecological integrity and connectivity than smaller sites. However, as per the
finding of Judge R.J. Bollard (NZRMA Decision No. A71/2001 (see methodology section)) the Napier
landscape is greatly diminished in biodiversity resources and thus every SNA is an important natural
capital asset. Within the context of the draft NPSIB, these sites are important nuclei for reconstructing
indigenous habitat.
Napier’s SNA ecosystems
The main SNA vegetation types were found to be salt marsh and salt meadow, mixed native forest
and kānuka forest. Other vegetation types also recorded were coastline vegetation and freshwater
wetland vegetation.
Salt marshes and salt meadows were present on saline plains. For all but one site these vegetation
types formed a matrix where the margins of the wetland were salt meadows (usually comprised of
the two glasswort herbs Selliera radicans and Samolus repens) and the interior was salt marsh (which
hosted primarily sea rush). This sequence of vegetation types represents the best match to an
indigenous ecosystem that probably would have been historically present in Napier. These saline
plains are part of the Ahuriri Estuary, which is listed as 1) a Significant Conservation Area under the
Regional Coastal Environment Plan, 2) a Wetland of Ecological and Representative Importance (WERI),
and 3) a Site of Special Wildlife Interest (SSWI) (HBRC 2018). This recognition relates to the support
function that the estuary provides to 29 species of fish and over 70 species of water birds (HBRC 2018).
All terrestrial vegetation types surveyed in Napier (i.e. not saline or freshwater systems) have species
compositions that differ from historic ecosystems because they have either been planted (e.g. almost
all of the forests) or highly modified (e.g. Esk Hills and the coastal herbfield). The planted forests were
found to be predominantly either mixed broadleaved forest or kānuka forest. Mixed broadleaved
forests were generally planted with high species richness, including some New Zealand species not
historically found in Hawke’s Bay and the occasional exotic species (e.g. avocado, Persea americana)
Kānuka forests were a mix of naturally regenerating secondary forest and native tree plantings and
were the dominant vegetation on Esk Hill. Kānuka and broadleaved forests were present on plains and
hills landforms. The fauna of these ecosystems represents a common assemblage of urban species.
Indigenous coastline vegetation types in Napier City are limited to one coastal herbfield SNA
(Esplanade herbfield). The site is dominated by exotic vegetation with a few indigenous species that
are now rare or uncommon within Napier City. It is important as an SNA because it is the sole
representative of this vegetation type and shingle beach ecosystem, and potentially provides habitat
for indigenous invertebrates.
20
Freshwater wetland vegetation can be found in the hills topographic unit of Napier City as a small part
of an Esk Hill SNA and at Lake Rotokaramu where kuta and raupō are the dominant species. Lake
Rotokaramu is known to be a significant habitat for indigenous birds with species observed including
pūkeko, tūī, swamp harrier, royal spoonbill, New Zealand dabchick, grey teal, Australasian bittern,
white-faced heron, fantail, Australasian shoveller and brown teal (Nathan Burkepile pers. comm.
2019).
Missing and poorly-represented ecosystems
As a result of systematic land clearance, multiple historic ecosystems are missing or poorly-
represented in Napier City and those that are still present are often highly modified. These ecosystems
should be considered wherever possible for ecological restoration efforts.
The absent forest types include coastal forest (tōtara, tawa, ngaio, māhoe) from the hills and drier
plains, and semi-swamp forest (kahikatea, mataī, rimu, tōtara, pukatea) from the alluvial plains,
floodplains and poorly-drained hillslopes (Figure 4).
Freshwater wetlands were historically present in Napier City in areas of periodic or permanent
flooding on the plains and hills. Along with the sedgeland-dominant wetlands there were extensive
flaxlands. Only two freshwater wetlands remain and there is no flaxland in the region. Also absent is
the ecological succession and ecotones which should progress from wetland sedges and grasses to
flaxland and then eventually to swamp forest.
Indigenous coastal ecosystems are poorly represented in Napier City with only one significant natural
area (“Esplanade Herbfield”) identified in this study. The limestone coastal cliffs of Bluff
Hill/Mataruahou would have historically been dominated by native vegetation that provided habitat
for forest fauna, including burrowing seabirds (Geoff Walls pers. comm. 2019). This unique historic
ecosystem has however been almost completely replaced by exotic weeds. Gravel fields dominate the
Napier coastline (Hashiba et al. 2014) and would have formerly existed in close association with low
dune systems. These are still evident just north of the airport (both sides of the highway), at Bay View,
on the beach immediately south of the Esk River mouth, also down to Awatoto (and beyond). These
ecosystems are potentially important habitat for native birds, lizards and invertebrates as well as
plants that are now rare and/or threatened (e.g. sand coprosma (Coprosma acerosa), pingao (Ficinia
spiralis) and Muehlenbeckia ephedroides). However, these ecosystems are now heavily modified by
anthropogenic developments and invasive species. This is a similar situation to much of the
Heretaunga Ecological District (Lee 1994). As noted earlier more detailed surveys of duneland and
shingle beach habitats in Napier City may reveal areas worthy of restoration.
Figure 4. Napier City’s current and historic indigenous vegetation types grouped by landform and salt and flood tolerance. Historic vegetation types are capitalised. Historic
secondary succession vegetation types are in smaller, lower case font. Current vegetation type for SNAs that are similar to historic vegetation types are bold and associated
with pictures. Novel current vegetation types found in SNAs are italicized. Arrows represent successional pathways or potential development of vegetation across gradients.
Significant natural areas and restoration targets
The total land area covered by SNAs in Napier City is 628.76 hectares. This represents approximately
5.94% of the Napier City territory. This includes both remaining indigenous vegetation cover and
restored/replanted indigenous vegetation cover.
The draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity states that an urgent nationally
coordinated response is required to halt the decline of Aotearoa New Zealand’s biodiversity and
ensure native species, habitats and ecosystems can thrive. This includes the identification of SNAs
(Policy 4) but also the restoration of environments with depleted indigenous biodiversity (Policy 19).
The draft NPSIB indicates that any areas (urban, peri-urban or other heavily modified areas) where
remaining indigenous cover is below 10 per cent are to be considered indigenous biodiversity depleted
environments. According to these criteria, the territory of Napier City is an indigenous biodiversity
depleted environment.
Policy 19 also recommends that:
“2. For all indigenous biodiversity depleted environments, identified in accordance with Policy 19(1),
establish in regional plans:
a) A target for indigenous cover, which in urban areas and peri-urban areas must be at least
10 per cent.
b) Restoration and reconstruction objectives for indigenous cover that prioritise: i.
representation of ecosystems naturally and formerly present, in particular nationally
threatened ecosystem types and indigenous vegetation in threatened land environments; ii.
species richness; iii. connectivity between, and buffering of, existing habitats; and iv. ecological
restoration at a landscape scale across the region.
c) Timeframes for achieving the indigenous cover target and restoration and reconstruction
objectives.
3. Specify in each regional biodiversity strategy, actions to achieve the objectives of the relevant
regional plan established in accordance with Policy 19(2)(b).”
For Napier City to reach the recommended minimum 10% target of indigenous cover, 429.41 hectares
of new indigenous cover needs to be created through ecological restoration and reconstruction (based
on the 5.94% SNA cover figure).
Ecological restoration and connectivity opportunities
The SNAs identified in this report highlight an opportunity to promote and direct ecological
restoration/reconstruction activity to link existing natural assets and restore missing indigenous
ecosystems. This “linking” has many potential benefits, including:
● Increasing Napier City’s indigenous vegetation cover and thus moving toward the 10%
minimum target for indigenous biodiversity depleted environments
● Buffering existing SNAs from edge effects and thus increasing ecological resilience
● Improving diversity of indigenous flora and fauna
● Providing ecosystem services for Napier residents
● Increasing opportunities for people to connect with nature
● Connecting the activities and energy of current restoration projects and groups
23
The importance of corridors to increase and sustain biodiversity has been identified at a regional scale
(Leathwick, Hashiba and Lynch 2017). Indigenous New Zealand ecosystems have greater ecological
integrity than exotic-indigenous mixes (also known as novel ecosystems) or exotic-dominated
ecosystems. Restoring healthy ecosystems to Napier and connecting SNAs should be guided by the
goal of improving local ecological integrity, the key elements of which are indigenous dominance,
species occupancy and environmental representation (Lee et al. 2005).
Opportunities for linking Napier SNAs are illustrated and ranked in the following map (Figure 5).
Features that would increase the opportunity to develop a natural landform corridor or are on public
land were considered positive linking features. Areas were scored from 1 to 7 (1 indicates little
potential value, 7 most potential value for restoration) on how many positive features they contained
e.g. current vegetation, distance between sites or along an existing ecological or landscape feature.
Figure 5. Opportunities for linking Napier SNAs and creating ecological connectivity. A ranking
of 7 indicates high potential for linking SNAs while 1 indicates a low potential.
24
The main areas of potential ecological restoration/reconstruction are along the rivers/waterways, and
in areas where exotic vegetation cover is currently dominant. Habitat along the Ahuriri Estuary SNA is
a good example of a current corridor for flora and fauna. Ideally there could also be a corridor along
the western hills to connect the hills with the rivers. For example, an ecological corridor could be
created to link the Dolbel Reserve SNAs to the Tutaekuri River and then along the river to the coast.
Another example is a link between the Esk Hill SNAs, the Esk River and the coast. In the built up urban
areas there is the potential to transform areas currently in exotic dominant cover, such as on Bluff Hill,
into a native dominant ecosystem by underplanting these areas with indigenous plants or replacing
exotics as the opportunities arise (e.g. through death or dieback). Walkways, cycleways and
waterways (i.e. drains) also hold potential for biodiversity corridor creation. Some specific methods
for conducting ecological restoration/reconstruction in Napier are provided in Appendix 5.
Conclusion and recommendations Thirty-two significant natural areas were identified in Napier City. This includes the nationally
significant Ahuriri Estuary and 14 sites that meet significance criteria at an ecological district scale, as
directed by the draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity. With only 5.94% of Napier
City land covered by SNAs, ecological restoration and reconstruction is required to meet the draft
NPSIB minimum 10% indigenous cover target for biodiversity depleted environments. Furthermore,
the majority of current SNAs are not well protected from pressures such as livestock or urban
development and a number of ecosystems that were historically present in Napier are now missing or
very poorly represented.
It is recommended that management resources be directed towards the 1) protection of existing SNAs,
2) the restoration and reconstruction of missing ecosystems and 3) the linking via corridors of SNAs
across Napier to ensure ecosystem buffering and ecological connectivity. Reflecting the two-tiered
ecological district and city scale approach to significance assessment, the authors recommend the
prioritisation of legal protection and ecological restoration efforts for the sites that reach significance
at an ecological district scale. These should be protected, managed and restored in accordance with
part two of the RMA and the draft NPSIB. However we also recommend that the city scale SNAs are
legally protected and considered for ecological restoration as they will be critical in achieving the
minimum 10% indigenous cover target and are often at higher risk of being lost due to a limited extent
and high development pressure. Ecological restoration should be focused on ecological integrity and
creation of functioning ecosystems, and may best be planned through the development of a Napier
biodiversity strategy.
25
References
Atkinson IAE. 1985. Derivation of vegetation mapping units for an ecological survey of Tongariro National Park, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany 23: 361-378.
Biodiversity Collaborative Group 2018 Report of the Biodiversity Collaborative Group. Biodiversity (Land and Freshwater) Stakeholder Trust.
Bland KJ, Kamp PJ. 2014. Hawke’s Bay forearc basin (eastern North Island, New Zealand): Stratigraphy, biostratigraphy, chronology, geological maps and paleogeography. Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, New Zealand, unpublished Petroleum Report PR4883. 66.
Byrom AE, Innes J, Binny RN. 2016. A review of biodiversity outcomes from possum-focused pest control in New Zealand. Wildlife Research 43(3) 228-253.
Chappell PR. 2013. The climate and weather of Hawke’s Bay: 3rd edition. NIWA Science and Technology Series Number 58. ISSN: 1173-0382.
Clarkson BR, Clarkson BD. 1991. Turanga Ecological District Survey Report for the Protected Natural Areas Programme No. 14. Department of Conservation.
Cornes TS, Thomson RE, Clarkson BD. 2012. Key ecological sites of Hamilton City: Volume 1. CBER Contract Report No. 121, prepared for Hamilton City Council. Hamilton, New Zealand: Centre for Biodiversity and Ecology Research, The University of Waikato.
Daly BK, Rijkse WC. 1976. Saline soils of the old Ahuriri Lagoon N.Z. Soil Bureau Scientific Report 27, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.
de Lange PJ, Glenny D, Braggins J, Renner M, von Konrat M, Engel J, Reeb C, Rolfe J. 2014. Conservation status of New Zealand hornworts and liverworts, 2014. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 11. Department of Conservation, Wellington. 31 p.
de Lange PJ, Rolfe JR, Barkla JW, Courtney SP, Champion PD, Perrie LR, Beadel SM, Ford KA, Breitwiesser I, Schönberger I, et al. 2018. Conservation status of New Zealand indigenous vascular plants, 2017. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 22. Department of Conservation, Wellington. 82 p.
Department of Conservation. 2019. Common lizard species. https://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/reptiles-and-frogs/lizards/common-lizard-species/ Accessed 30 July 2019.
Dravid PN, Brown LJ. 1997. Heretaunga Plains groundwater study executive summary. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council - Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Ltd.
Grant PJ 1996 Hawke’s Bay Forests of Yesterday. CHB Print Waipukurau. Hashiba K, Wade O, Hesketh W. 2014. Hawke’s Bay biodiversity inventory, current state of knowledge.
Report No. RM 13/23 - 4554. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, Napier. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. 2014. Hawke’s Bay regional coastal environment plan, operative.
Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, Napier. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. 2018. Te Whanganui a Orotū (Ahuriri Estuary). Outstanding Water Body
Report. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, Napier. Hughey KFD, Clapcott J, Goodwin E, Jonas H, Cheyne J, Rook H, Cameron F, Maxwell I, Shap T 2012.
Native Fish in Hawke's Bay: Development and application of the River Values Assessment System (RiVAS and RiVAS+). Prepared for Hawke's Bay Regional Council. HBRC Plan No. 4379. Christchurch, Lincoln University.
Hunnable EG, Spackman LS. 1974. The ecology of the Ahuriri Estuary and wildlife refuge. Report to Napier City Council by TJ Sprott and Associates.
Innes J, Kelly D, McC. Overton J, Gillies C. 2010. Predation and other factors currently limiting New Zealand forest birds. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 34(1): 86-114.
Johnstone MacLeod L, Dickson R, Leckie C, Stephenson BM, Glen AS. 2015. Possum control and bird recovery in an urban landscape, New Zealand. Conservation Evidence 12: 44-47.
Knox GA. 1979. Ahuriri Estuary and environmental study. Ahuriri Estuary Technical Committee. Knox GA, Bolton LA, Sagar P. 1978. The Ecology of Westshore Lagoon, Ahuriri Estuary, Hawke Bay.
Estuarine Research Unit, University of Canterbury.
26
Landcare Research. 2015. Landcover Database version 4.1, Mainland New Zealand. Available from https://lris.scinfo.org.nz/layer/48423-lcdb-v41-land-cover-database-version-41-mainland-new-zealand/.
Laughlin DC, Clarkson BD. 2018. Tree Seedling Survival Depends on Canopy Age, Cover and Initial Composition: Trade-offs in Forest Restoration Enrichment Planting. Ecological Restoration 36(1): 52-61.
Leathwick JR, Hashiba K, Lynch B. 2017. Biodiversity rankings for the Hawkes Bay Region HBRC Report No. RM 17-20. HBRC Publication No. 4954.
Lee A. 1994. Heretaunga Ecological District Survey Report for the Protected Natural Areas Programme. Department of Conservation.
Lee W, McGlone M, Wright E. 2005. Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring: A Review of National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring by the Department of Conservation. Landcare Research Contract Report: LC0405/122.
Lee JM, Bland KJ, Townsend DB, Kamp PJJ. (comps) 2011. Geology of the Hawke's Bay area. Lower Hutt: GNS Science. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences 1:250,000 geological map 8-93.
MacLeod LJ, Dickson R, Leckie C, Stephenson BM, Glen AS. 2015. Possum control and bird recovery in an urban landscape, New Zealand. Conservation Evidence 12: 44-47.
Madrarasz-Smith A. 2014. Ahuriri Estuary: contact recreation and food gathering review. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council.
McEwen, WM. 1987. Ecological Regions and Districts of New Zealand, third revised edition in four 1:500000 maps, sheet 1. New Zealand Biological Resources Centre, publication no. 5. Wellington: Department of Conservation.
Ministry of Works. 1971. National Resources Survey Part VI: Hawke’s Bay Region. Compiled by the Town and Country Planning Division. Government Printer, Wellington.
Myers SC, Park GN, Overmars FB. 1987. The New Zealand Protected Natural Areas Programme. A guidebook for the rapid ecological survey of natural areas. New Zealand Biological Resources Centre, Publication 6.
Napier City Council. 2019. District plan review layers geographic database (extracted 2019). Newsome PFJ, Wilde RH, Willoughby EJ. 2000. Land Resource information System Spatial Layers
Landcare Research. NZ Herald. 2019. “Leopard seal makes Napier Sailing Club its home”.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12248344. Accessed 30 July 2019.
Nicholls JL. 1979. The concept of Ecological Districts: A possible framework for a national biological inventory. In proceedings of Biological Resources Workshop 12-13 September, 1979. Commission for the Environment, Wellington. 192 pp.
Norton DA. 2002. Edge effects in low temperate New Zealand rain forest. DOC Science Internal Series 27. Department of Conservation.
NZPCN: Common estuarine species [internet]. New Zealand; c2012 [updated 2012 Sep 23; cited 2019 Apr 18]. Available from: www.nzpcn.org.nz/page.aspx?ecosystems_plant_communities_estuaries_common_species.
Overdyck E, Clarkson BD, Laughlin DC, Gemmill CEC. 2013. Testing Broadcast Seeding Methods to Restore Urban Forests in the Presence of Seed Predators. Restoration Ecology 21(6): 763-769.
Park GN. in association with P. Dingwall… (et al.)… 1983. Protected Natural Areas for New Zealand. Report of a Scientific Working Party convened by the Biological Resources Centre (DSIR) (14-17 December, 1982). Wellington.
Parrish GR. 1998. Wildlife and wildlife habitat of Hawke’s Bay rivers. Science and Research Series No.2. Department of Conservation.
Peters M, Clarkson B. 2010. Wetland restoration: a handbook for New Zealand freshwater systems. Manaaki Whenua Press, Lincoln N.Z.
27
Porter RER, Clapperton BK, Coleman JD. 2010. Distribution, abundance and control of the rook (Corvus frugilegus L.) in Hawke's Bay, New Zealand, 1969 –2006. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 38(8): 25-36.
Robertson HA, Baird K, Dowding JE, Elliott GP, Hitchmough RA, Miskelly CM, McArthur N, O’Donnell
CFJ, Sagar PM, Scofield RP, Taylor GA. 2017. Conservation status of New Zealand birds, 2016. New
Zealand Threat Classification Series 19. Department of Conservation, Wellington. 23 p.
Spurr EB. 2012. New Zealand garden bird survey - analysis of the first four years. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 36(3): 287-299.
Stuff. 2018. “Rare Weddell seal travels from Antarctica to lounge on Napier beach”. https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/106015463/rare-weddell-seal-travels-from-antartica-to-lounge-on-napier-beach. Accessed 20 July 2019.
Twydle PW. 1994. Birdwatching in Hawke’s Bay. A guide to prime birding locations. Napier, N.Z.: P.W. Twydle.
Wallace KJ, Laughlin DC, Clarkson BD. 2017. Exotic weeds and fluctuating microclimate can constrain native plant regeneration in urban forest restoration. Ecological Applications 27(4): 1268-1279.
Whaley KJ, Clarkson BD, Emmett DK, Innes JG, Leathwick JR, Smale M, Whaley PT. 2002. Tiniroto, Waihua, Mahia and Matawai Ecological Districts: Survey report for the Protected Natural Areas Programme. Department of Conservation.
White SE. 2004. Ahuriri Estuary Environmental Evaluation. Report prepared for Hawke’s Bay Regional Council by Bioresearches: EMI 0422, HBRC Plan No. 3503.
Young A, Mitchell N. 1994. Microclimate and vegetation edge effects in a fragmented podocarp-broadleaf forest in New Zealand. Biological Conservation 67(1): 63-72.
Yule AC. 1958. An historical geography of the Hawkes Bay area. Thesis University of Canterbury.
28
Appendices
Appendix 1: SNA - Site assessment form 26
Appendix 2: Summary table of Napier significant natural areas 31
Appendix 3: Flora species from surveys, literature and landowner information 37
Appendix 4: Fauna species from surveys, literature and landowner information 44
Appendix 5: Methods for conducting terrestrial ecological restoration/reconstruction 47
Appendix 6: All completed SNA assessment forms - provided in a separate document
29
Appendix 1: SNA – Site assessment form
Site number: Site Name: Recorder: Grid Ref/GPS: Date: Area m²: Landform:
General information for the site: Tenure (tick all that apply)
Public Private Māori Leased Mixed Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal Reserve (TA) Covenant (QEII) Reserve (DoC) Agreement (RC) If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures: Fencing (tick one)
No fencing Some fencing Mostly fenced Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? Yes/No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply) Urban subdivisions Lifestyle blocks Garden; parkland Open space; Bare land; Recreation land Dairying, cropping or horticulture Sheep, beef or other agriculture Plantation forestry Permaculture tree lands; planted natives Coastal dunes Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
Site Map Site Description
30
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA (Source from Draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity: Biodiversity Collaborative Group 2018 pp. 72-76)
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness 1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern 2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness 3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context 4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Unit Num
ber
Hydrological R
egime
Category
Code
Character
Habitat area estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
31
Flora and Fauna: Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Unit 4
Forest/scrub Canopy condition 1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%.
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback.
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback.
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback.
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare.
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species.
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant.
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present.
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
Wetland/Estuary Unit: Description (tick appropriate category) Lake Shallow water <2m Swamp Marsh
Fen
Bog
Shrub-carr
Grass/sedge meadow
Deciduous margin Saline Other (describe)
Water in the system?
Yes No Evidence of water level changes?
Yes
No Unsure
Degree of water turbidity
Clear Water Quality
Algal blooms Pollution
Translucent
Opaque
Plant Communities (enter % cover) Wetland vegetation
Sedge/grass Herbs Shrubs Trees
Wetland margin vegetation
Sedge/grass Herbs Shrubs Trees Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte %
OBL FACW FAC FACU UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin High ◻ Medium ◻ Low ◻ High ◻ Medium ◻ Low ◻
32
Invasive species in wetland: cover % Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover % Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ◻ surface flows ◻stream/river ◻ precipitation only ◻ Erosion/Disturbance Wetland Wetland margin Comments No disturbance
Coastline habitat Unit: Description % Sand binders Grass/Sedges Herbs Shrubs Trees Type (tick all that apply) Fore dune Second dune Rear dune
Rocky shore Coastal cliff Wetland Substrate % Boulders/rocks Mud/Silt Soil Sand Native plant vigour in coastal habitat High ◻ Medium ◻ Low ◻ Erosion/Disturbance (comments)
Fauna
Threats Pest plants
Indicator
Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Unit 4
Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
2 Common, 10%-
50% ground area.
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area.
4 None present. Vine weeds 1 Very
common, >50% canopy cover.
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover.
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover.
4 None present. Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy cover.
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or canopy cover.
4 None present.
33
Pest animals If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Unit 4
Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge.
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges.
4 No damage.
Human Associated Activities (Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Notes
Field sheets for inventory and quick assessment. Adapted from Cornes, Thomson, Clarkson 2012
Appendix 2: Summary table of Napier significant natural areas
Site Number
Name *sites containing remnant vegetation in bold
Total m2 in Napier (excluding water)
Landform Vegetation type 2019 Historic vegetation type
Significance criteria *ecological district scale in bold
Significance rank
1 Esk Hill 1 32400.7
Hill 1. Kunzea robusta forest 2. Mixed podocarp-broadleaved forest
Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3A, 3C, 4B
1
2 Esk Hill 2 137521.8
Hill 1. Kunzea robusta forest 2. Mixed broadleaved-exotic dominated forest 3. Kunzea robusta/Piper excelsum- Melicytus ramiflorus
forest 4. Kunzea robusta- Myoporum laetum/Melicytus
ramiflorus forest 5. Kunzea robusta/Ulex europaeus forest
Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4A, 4B
1
3 Esk Hill 3 14263.4 Hill 1. Kunzea robusta forest 2. Sophora spp.- mixed broadleaved forest
Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4B
1
4 Esk Hill 4 4491.7 Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved shrubland Coastal forest
3B, 3C, 4B
3
5 Esk Hill 5 27638.0
Hill 1. Kunzea robusta/Piper excelsum forest 2. Typha orientalis/Paspalum distichum, Carex spp.
wetland
Coastal forest Freshwater wetland
1A, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 4B
1
6 Esk Hill 6 2723.2 Hill 1. Mixed native -exotic broadleaved forest 2. Mixed broadleaved - Kunzea robusta forest
Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4B
2
35
Site Number
Name *contains remnant vegetation in bold
Total m2 in Napier (excluding water)
Landform Vegetation type 2019 Historic vegetation type
Significance criteria *regional scale in bold
Significance rank
7 Esk Hill 7 86138.1
Hill 1. Kunzea robusta/Pteris tremula forest 2. Kunzea robusta/Carex spp, Cyperus ustulatus forest
Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3A, 3C, 4A, 4B
1
8 Esk Hill 8 4797.6
Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved shrubland Coastal forest
2A, 3B, 3C, 4B
2
9 Esk Hill 9 18050.1
Hill 1. Kunzea robusta forest
Coastal forest
1A, 3A, 3C, 4B
1
10 Esk Hill 10 20849.7
Hill 1. Kunzea robusta forest
Coastal forest
1A, 3A, 3C, 4B
1
11 Esk Hill 11 7667.4 Hill 1. Kunzea robusta forest
Coastal forest
1A, 3A, 3C, 4B
1
12 Esk Hill 12 16461.2
Hill 1. Pinus spp./Kunzea robusta forest Coastal forest 1A, 3A, 3C, 4B
1
13 Kaiangaroa 5300.1 Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved shrubland Coastal forest 3B, 3C 3
36
Site Number
Name *contains remnant vegetation in bold
Total m2 in Napier (excluding water)
Landform Vegetation type 2019 Historic vegetation type
Significance criteria *regional scale in bold
Significance rank
14 Ahuriri Estuary 4540821.9 Saline plain
1. Salicornia quinqueflora-pasture grass wetland 2. Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis/Salicornia
quinqueflora- Pasture grass wetland 3. Pasture grass- Lolium arundinaceum/Salicornia
quinqueflora wetland 4. Isolepis cernua- Puccinellia fasciculata/Selliera
radicans- Spergularia tasmanica- Plantago cornopus wetland
5. Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis/ Thyridia repens- Cotula coronopifolia wetland
6. Bolboschoenus/Samolus repens- Thyridia repens wetland
Saline wetland
1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 4A, 4B, 4C
1
15 Bayview wetland
250107.0
Saline plain
1. Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis/Salicornia quinqueflora wetland
2. Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis/pasture grass wetland
3. Symphyotrichum subulatum/Cotula cornonpifolia, Samolus repens- Thyridia repens- Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis- pasture grass wetland
4. Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis/Selliera radicans- Spergularia tasmanica wetland
Saline wetland
1A, 2A, 3A, 3C, 3D, 4A, 4B
1
16 Ahuriri plain wetland
882725.0
Saline plain
1. Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis - pasture grass/ Salicornia quinqueflora wetland
Saline wetland 1A, 2B, 3C, 3D, 4A, 4B
1
17 Esplanade herbfield
8037.4
Coastal margin
1. Chrysanthemoides monilifera/Agapanthus praecox 2. Cotoneaster glaucophyllus/pasture grass/Gazania
linearis herbfield
Coastal herbfield 1A, 2A, 3A, 3C, 3D
1
37
Site Number
Name *contains remnant vegetation in bold
Total m2 in Napier (excluding water)
Landform Vegetation type 2019 Historic vegetation type
Significance criteria *regional scale in bold
Significance rank
18 Westshore Reserve bush
12308.1
Plain
1. Mixed broadleaved-Myoporum laetum forest Semi-swamp forest
2A, 3B, 3C, 4B
2
19 Bluff Hill (Mataruahou)
9196.4
Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved forest Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3C
3
20 Lake Rotokaramu
37171.9
Hill 1. Eleocharis sphacelata- Typha orientalis/Juncus wetland.
Freshwater wetland
1A, 1B, 2A, 3A, 3C, 3D
1
21 Embankment road wetland
20857.6 Saline plain
1. Salicornia quinqueflora -pasture grass wetland Saline wetland
1A, 3C, 3D 3
22 Harakeke Reserve
19422.3 Plain
1. Mixed broadleaved-Pittosporum spp. forest 2. Typha orientalis/Phormium tenax- Bolboschoenus
spp/Lemna pasture grass wetland
Semi-swamp forest Freshwater wetland
2A, 2B, 3C 3
23 Halliwell Reserve 1
11338.8
Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved-Dacrycarpus dacrydioides forest Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3C
2
24 Halliwell Reserve 2
12149.2
Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved-podocarp shrubland Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3C 2
38
Site Number
Name *contains remnant vegetation in bold
Total m2 in Napier (excluding water)
Landform Vegetation type 2019 Historic vegetation type
Significance criteria *regional scale in bold
Significance rank
25 SH50 planting 4776.8
Plain
1. Mixed podocarp-broadleaved forest
Semi-swamp forest
1A, 2A, 3C
3
26 Dolbel Reserve 1
22173.7 Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved forest Coastal forest 1A, 2A, 3A, 3C
2
27 Dolbel Reserve 2
24591.6
Hill 1. Mixed broadleaved forest Coastal forest 1A, 2A, 3C 3
28 Friend’s Bush 3736.0
Plain
1. Mixed podocarp-broadleaved forest Semi-swamp forest
1A, 2A, 3C
3
29 Otatara Park 6099.2
Hill
1. Mixed broadleaved forest
Coastal forest
1A, 2A, 3C 2
30 Otatara Pa 1 11213.2 Hill 1. Kunzea robusta forest Coastal forest 1A, 3A, 3C, 4B
2
31 Otatara Pa 2 4543.4 Hill 1. Myoporum laetum forest. Coastal forest 3C, 4B 3
32 Otatara Pa 3 28093.1
Hill 1. Myoporum laetum -mixed broadleaved forest. 2. Sophora tetraptera- Cytisus proliferus- Coprosma
robusta forest.
Coastal forest
3A, 3C, 4B
2
Appendix 3: Flora species from surveys, literature and landowner information
Exotic species noted by asterisks. This list is not exhaustive.
Common Name Species Name
Abies spp.* Abies spp*
Acer spp.* Acer spp.*
Actinidia spp.* Actinidia spp.*
Agapanthus* Agapanthus praecox *
Agave spp.* Agave spp.*
Akeake Dodonaea viscosa
Akiraho Olearia paniculata
Alyssum spp.* Alyssum spp.*
American plum* Prunus americana*
Apple of Sodom* Solanum linnaeanum*
Apple tree* Malus x domestica*
Asphodel* Asphodelus fistulosus*
Astelia spp. Astelia spp.
Avocado* Persea americana*
Azolla spp. Azolla spp.
Bachelor’s button Cotula coronopifolia
Banksia* Banksia integrifolia*
Barnyard grass* Echinochloa crus-galli*
Bay tree* Laurus nobilis*
Beard grass* Polypogon monspeliensis*
Bermuda grass* Cynodon dactylon*
Bindweed* Calystegia silvatica*
Black locust* Robinia pseudoacacia*
Black maire Nestegis cunninghamii
Black nightshade* Solanum nigrum*
Blackberry* Rubus fruticosus*
Blackwood Acacia melanoxylon*
Blue morning glory* Ipomoea indica*
Blue passionflower* Passiflora caerulea*
Bolboschoenus spp. Bolboschoenus spp.
Boneseed* Chrysanthemoides monilifera*
Boxthorn* Lycium ferocissimum*
Bracken fern/manehu Pteridium esculentum
Broad-leaved dock* Rumex obtusifolius*
Broad-leaved plantain* Plantago major*
Broadleaf/kāpuka Griselinia littoralis
Bromelia spp.* Bromelia spp.*
Broomrape* Orobanche minor*
Buck’s horn plantain Plantago coronopus*
40
Bur medick* Medicago nigra*
Bush lawyer/ tātarāmoa Rubus schmidelioides
Bushy starwort* Symphyotrichum subulatum*
Cabbage tree/tī Cordyline australis
Californian poppy* Eschscholzia californica*
Callistemon spp.* Callistemon spp.*
Camellia* Camellia japonica*
Canada bluegrass* Poa compressa*
Candelabra aloe * Aloe arborescens*
Catsear* Hypochaeris radicata*
Century plant* Agave americana*
Chicory* Cichorium intybus*
Chinese windmill palm* Trachycarpus fortunei*
Climbing asparagus* Asparagus scandens*
climbing dock* Rumex sagittatus*
Coastal tree daisy Olearia solandri
Common barberry* Berberis vulgaris*
Convolvulus* Convolvulus arvensis*
Coprosma crassifolia Coprosma crassifolia
Coprosma hybrid Coprosma hybrid
Coprosma propinqua Coprosma propinqua
Coprosma spathulata Coprosma spathulata
Corokia cheesemanii Corokia x cheesemanii
Cotoneaster* Cotoneaster coriaceus*
Cotoneaster* Cotoneaster glaucophyllus*
Crack willow* Salix fragilis*
Crassula spp.* Crassula spp.*
Creeping mallow* Modiola caroliniana*
Cupressaceae spp.* Cupressaceae spp.*
Cutty grass/rautahi Carex geminata
Deschampsia spp. Deschampsia spp.
Elephant ear* Alocasia brisbanensis*
Euphorbia spp.* Euphorbia spp.*
Exotic broom* Cytisus scoparius*
Feathertop Cenchrus longisetus*
Fennel* Foeniculum vulgare*
Field madder* Sherardia arvensis*
Field poppy* Papaver rhoeas*
Fierce lancewood Pseudopanax ferox
Fig* Ficus carica*
Five finger Pseudopanax arboreus
Flax/harakeke Phormium tenax
Formosan lily* Lilium formosanum*
41
Gazania* Gazania linearis*
Gazania* Gazania rigens*
Geranium spp.* Geranium spp.*
German ivy* Delairea odorata*
Gingko* Gingko biloba*
Glasswort/ ureure Salicornia quinqueflora
Glossostigma elatinoides Glossostigma elatinoides
Gorse* Ulex europaeus*
Grey sedge* Carex divulsa*
Grey willow* Salix cinerea*
Gum* Eucalyptus spp.*
Hairy birdsfoot trefoil* Lotus suaveolens*
Hard beech/hututawai Fuscospora truncata
Harestail* Lagurus ovatus*
Hawthorn* Crataegus monogyna*
Hedge artemisia* Artemisia arborescens*
Hen and chicken fern/ maku Asplenium bulbiferum
Hīnau Elaeocarpus dentatus
Horses mane weed Ruppia polycarpa
Hound’s tongue/ kōwaowao Microsorum pustulatum
Houpara Pseudopanax lessonii
Hydrangea* Hydrangea macrophylla*
Smooth catsear* Hypochaeris glauca*
Inkweed* Phytolacca octandra*
Iris spp.* Iris spp.*
Ivy* Hedera helix*
Jerusalem cherry* Solanum pseudocapsicum*
Jointed rush* Juncus articulatus*
Jointed wire rush/ oioi Apodasmia similis
Juncus spp.* Juncus spp.*
Kahikatea Dacrycarpus dacrydioides
Kaikomako Pennantia corymbosa
Kakabeak Clianthus maximus
Kanono Coprosma grandifolia
Kānuka Kunzea robusta
Karaka Corynocarpus laevigatus
Karamū Coprosma robusta
Karo Pittosporum crassifolium
Karo Pittosporum ralphii
Kauri Agathis australis
Kawakawa Piper excelsum
King fern/ mouku Ptisana salicina
King Island melilot* Melilotus indicus*
42
Kiokio Blechnum novae-zelandiae
Kōhūhū Pittosporum tenuifolium
Korokio Corokia cotoneaster
Kōromiko Veronica stricta
Kōwhai Sophora microphylla
Kutakuta Eleocharis sphacelata
Lacebark/ houhere Hoheria populnea
Lacebark/ houhere Hoheria sexstylosa
Ladder fern* Nephrolepis cordifolia*
Lancewood/ hoheka Pseudopanax crassifolius
Large-leaved kowhai/ kōwhai Sophora tetraptera
Lavendula spp.* Lavendula spp.*
Leather-leaf fern Pyrrosia eleagnifolia
Lemna spp. Lemna spp.
Lemonwood/ tarata Pittosporum eugenioides
Libertia spp.* Libertia spp.*
Loquat* Eriobotrya japonica*
Lupinus spp.* Lupinus spp.*
Maderia vine* Anredera cordifolia*
Māhoe Melicytus ramiflorus
Mamaku Cyathea medullaris
Mānuka Leptospermum scoparium
Māpou Myrsine australis
Marble leaf/ putaputawētā Carpodetus serratus
Mataī Prumnopitys taxifolia
Mediterranean barley grass* Critesion hystrix*
Mercer grass* Paspalum distichum*
Mexican daisy* Erigeron karvinskianus*
Miro Prumnopitys ferruginea
Mondo grass* Ophiopogon japonicus
Montpellier broom* Genista monspessulana*
Moth plant* Araujia sericifera*
Mountain flax/ wharariki Phormium cookianum
Muehlenbeckia spp. Muehlenbeckia spp.
Naked lady* Amaryllis belladonna*
Narrow-leaved houhere/ houhi Hoheria angustifolia
Narrow-leaved maire/ maire kōtae Nestegis montana
Narrow-leaved plantain* Plantago lanceolata*
Nasturtium* Tropaeolum majus*
New Zealand giant umbrella sedge/ toetoe upokotangata
Cyperus ustulatus
New Zealand ice plant/ horokaka Disphyma australe
New Zealand musk Thyridia repens
New Zealand passionfruit/ kōhia Passiflora tetrandra
43
New Zealand sea spurrey Spergularia tasmanica
Ngaio Myoporum laetum
Nīkau Rhopalostylis sapida
Niniao Helichrysum lanceolatum
Northern rata/ rātā Metrosideros robusta
Oak* Quercus spp.*
Olearia spp. Olearia spp.
Olive* Olea spp.*
Orache* Atriplex prostrata*
Orange firethorn* Pyracantha angustifolia*
Oval sedge* Carex leporina*
Oxtongue* Helminthotheca echioides*
Pale flax* Linum bienne*
Pampas* Cortaderia selloana *
Paspalum* Paspalum dilatatum*
Peppercress* Lepidium africanum*
Periwinkle* Vinca major*
Phormium spp. Phormium spp.
Pig’s ear* Cotyledon orbiculata*
Pigeonwood/ porokaiwhiri Hedycarya arborea
Pimelea Pimelea urvilliana subsp. urvilliana
Pimpernel* Lysimachia arvensis*
Pine* Pinus spp.*
Poa spp. Poa spp.
Pohuehue Muehlenbeckia australis
Pōhutukawa Metrosideros excelsa
Poroporo Solanum laciniatum
Prostrate kowhai Sophora prostrata
Prunus spp.* Prunus spp.*
Pseudopanax discolor Pseudopanax discolor
Pseudopanax hybrid Pseudopanax spp. x
Pseudopanax laetus Pseudopanax laetus
Puka / akapuka Griselinia lucida
Puka Meryta sinclairii
Pūrei Carex secta
Purging flax* Linum catharticum*
Pūriri Vitex lucens
Purple-top* Verbena bonariensis*
Ramarama Lophomyrtus bullata
Rangiora Brachyglottis repanda
Rasp fern Blechnum parrisiae
Rat’s-tail* Sporobolus africanus*
Raupō Typha orientalis
44
Red beech/ hututawai Fuscospora fusca
Red horopito/ ōramarama Pseudowintera colorata
Remuremu Selliera radicans
Rengarenga Arthropodium cirratum
Rewarewa Knightia excelsa
Ribbonwood/ mānatu Plagianthus regius
Ricciocarpos natans Ricciocarpos natans
Rimu Dacrydium cupressinum
Ripgut brome* Bromus diandrus*
Rōhutu Lophomyrtus obcordata
Rose spp.* Rosa spp.*
Rosemary* Rosmarinus officinalis*
Round-leaved fern/ tarawera Pellaea rotundifolia
Salt grass* Puccinellia fasciculata*
Salt marsh ribbonwood/ mākaka Plagianthus divaricatus
Sand coprosma/ tarakupenga Coprosma acerosa
Scirpus spp. Scirpus spp.
Scrub pohuehue/ pōhuehue Muehlenbeckia complexa
Sea primrose/ māakoako Samolus repens
Sea rush Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis
Shore bindweed/ rauparaha Calystegia soldanella
Sickle spleenwort/ petako Asplenium polyodon
Silver fern/ ponga Cyathea dealbata
Sisyrinchium spp.* Sisyrinchium spp.*
Slender birdsfoot trefoil* Lotus angustissimus*
Slender clubrush Isolepis cernua
Small-flowered cranesbill* Geranium pusillum*
Small-flowered mallow* Malva parviflora*
Smilax* Asparagus asparagoides*
Smilograss* Piptatherum miliaceum*
Soft brome* Bromus hordeaceus*
Sow thistle/ pūhā* Sonchus oleraceus*
Spanish dagger* Yucca gloriosa*
Spider plant* Chlorophytum comosum
Spurrey* Spergula arvensis*
Star thistle* Centaurea calcitrapa*
Stonecrop* Sedum acre*
Storksbill Erodium cicutarium
Strawberry clover* Trifolium fragiferum*
Suckling clover* Trifolium dubium*
Supplejack/ kareao Ripogonum scandens
Sweet clover* Melilotus albus*
Sweet fern Pteris macilenta
45
Sweet vernal* Anthoxanthum odoratum*
Tall fescue* Lolium arundinaceum*
Tamarillo* Solanum betaceum*
Tānekaha Phyllocladus trichomanoides
Taraire Beilschmiedia tarairi
Tasmanian ngaio* Myoporum insulare*
Tauhinu Ozothamnus leptophyllus
Taupata Coprosma repens
Tawa Beilschmiedia tawa
Tender brake/ turawera Pteris tremula
Teucrium parvifolium Teucrium parvifolium
Thin-leaved coprosma/ aruhe Coprosma areolata
Thornapple* Datura stramonium*
Tītoki Alectryon excelsus
Toad rush* Juncus bufonius*
Toetoe Austroderia spp.
Tōtara Podocarpus totara
Tree lucerne* Chamaecytisus proliferus*
Tree privet* Ligustrum lucidum*
Triglochin striata Triglochin striata
Tulip tree Liriodendron tulipifera*
Veronica cultivar Veronica spp. cultivar
Veronica spp. Veronica spp.
Vetch* Vicia sativa*
Viper’s bugloss* Echium vulgare*
Wandering Jew* Tradescantia fluminensis*
Water speedwell* Veronica anagallis-aquatica*
Wattle* Acacia spp.*
Wharangi Melicope ternata
Whau Entelea arborescens
Whekī Dicksonia squarrosa
White clover* Trifolium repens*
White poplar* Populus alba*
Wild parsnip* Pastinaca sativa*
William’s broom Carmichaelia williamsii
Willow weed* Persicaria maculosa*
Windmill grass* Chloris truncata*
Wineberry/ makomako Aristotelia serrata
Winged thistle* Carduus tenuiflorus*
Wīwī/ knobby clubrush Ficinia nodosa
Woolly clover* Trifolium tomentosum*
Woolly mullein* Verbascum thapsus*
46
Appendix 4: Fauna species from surveys, literature and landowner information
Exotic species noted by asterisks. This list is not exhaustive.
Common name Species name
Australasian bittern/matuku hūrepo Botaurus poiciloptilus
Australasian gannet/tākapu Morus serrator
Australasian shoveler/kuruwhengi Anas rhynchotis
Australian magpie/makipae* Gymnorhina tibicen
Banded dotterel/tūturiwhatu Charadrius bicinctus
Barracouta Thrysites atun
Bar-tailed godwit/kūaka Limosa lapponica
Bellbird/korimako Anthornis melanura
Black shag/kawau Phalacrocorax carbo
Black swan/kakīānau Cygnus atratus
Black-backed gull/karoro Larus dominicanus
Black-billed gull/tarāpuka Larus bulleri
Black-fronted dotterel Elseyornis melanops
Blue mackerel Scomber japonicus
Brown trout/Taraute * Salmo trutta
California quail* Callipepla californica
Canada goose* Branta canadensis
Caspian tern/taranui Hydroprogne caspia
Chaffinch/pahirini* Fringilla coelebs
Cockabully Tripterygion nigripenne
Cockles Austrovenus stutchburyi
Common bully Gobiomorphus cotidianus
Common myna* Acridotheres tristis
Common pheasant/peihana* Phasianus colchicus
Common redpoll* Carduelis flammea
Common skink Oligosoma nigriplantare
Common smelt Retropinna retropinna
Common sole Pletorhampus novaezeelandiae
Common starling* Sturnus vulgaris
Dunnock* Prunella modularis
Eurasian blackbird/manu pango* Turdus merula
Eurasian skylark/kaireka* Alauda arvensis
European goldfinch* Carduelis carduelis
Fanworm* Ficopomatus enigmaticus
Far-eastern curlew* Numenius madagascariensis
Garfish Hyporhamphus ihi
Green chiton Chiton glaucus
Grey duck/pārera Anas superciliosa
Grey mullet Mugil cephalus
Grey teal/tētē moroiti Anas gracilis
Grey warbler/riroriro Gerygone igata
47
Greylag goose/kuihi* Anser anser
Grey-tailed tattler Tringa brevipes
Gurnard/puwhaiau Chelidonichthys kumu
Hornshell Zeacumantus lutulentus
House sparrow/ tiu* Passer domesticus
Inanga (and juveniles= whitebait) Galaxius maculatus
Kahawai Arripis trutta
Kererū Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae
Kingfish/Kahu Seriola grandis
Lesser knot/huahou Calidris canutus
Little black shag/kawau tūi Phalacrocorax sulcirostris
Little egret Egretta garzetta
Little penguin Eudyptula minor
Little shag/kawau paka Phalacrocorax melanoleucos
Little tern Sternula albifrons
Long-finned eel/tuna Anguilla dieffenbachi
Mallard duck* Anas platyrhynchos
Marsh crake/koitareke Porzana pusilla
Moki Latridopsis ciliaris
Mudsnail Amphibola crenata
Mute swan* Cygnus olor
New Zealand dabchick/weweia Poliocephalus rufopectus
New Zealand fantail/pīwakawaka Rhipidura fuliginosa
New Zealand pigeon/kererū Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae
New Zealand scaup/pāpango Aythya novaeseelandiae
Pacific golden plover Pluvialis fulva
Paradise shelduck/pūtangitangi Tadorna variegata
Parore Girella tricuspidata
Pied stilt/poaka Himantopus himantopus
Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos
Pipi Paphies australis
Pukeko Porphyrio melanotus
Red cod/hoka Physiculus bachus
Red-billed gull/tarāpunga Larus novaehollandiae
Red-necked stint Calidris ruficollis
Reef heron/matuku moana Egretta sacra
River flounder Rhombosolea retiaria
Rock pigeon* Columba livia
Royal spoonbill/kōtuku ngutupapa Platalea regia
Ruddy turnstone Arenaria interpres
Sacred kingfisher/kōtare Todiramphus sanctus
Sand flounder Rhombosolea plebia
School shark/makohuarau Galeorhinus australis
Sharp-tailed sandpiper Calidris acuminata
Shining cuckoo/pīpīwharauroa Chrysococcyx lucidus
48
Short-finned eel/tuna Anguilla australis
Silvereye/tauhou Zosterops lateralis
Skate/uku Raja spp.
Snapper/tamure Chrysophrys auratus
Song thrush* Turdus philomelos
South Island pied oystercatcher/tōrea Haematopus finschi
Spiny dogfish/pioke Squalus Sppr.
Spotless crake/pūweto Porzana tabuensis
Spotty Pseudolabrus celidotus
Spur-winged plover Vanellus miles
Stargazer/kourepoua Genyagnus monopterygius
Swamp harrier/kāhu Circus approximans
Topshell Melagraphis aethiops
Trevally/araara Caranx lutescens
Tūī Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae
Tunnelling mud crab/päpaka Austrohelice crassa
Variable oystercatcher/tōrea pango Haematopus unicolor
Wedge clam/hanikura Macomona liliana
Welcome swallow/warou Hirundo neoxena
Whelk/kawari Cominella glandiformis
Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus
White heron/kōtuku Ardea modesta
White-faced heron/matuku moana Egretta novaehollandiae
White-fronted tern/tara Sterna striata
Whitehead/pōpokatea Mohoua albicilla
Wrybill/ngutuparore Anarhynchus frontalis
Yellow-bellied flounder/pātiki Rhombosolea leporina
Yellow-eyed mullet/awa Aldrichetta fosteri
Yellowhammer* Emberiza citrinella
49
Appendix 5: Methods for conducting terrestrial ecological
restoration/reconstruction
The main aim of the following management recommendations is to increase indigenous vegetation
cover, which would in turn increase habitat for indigenous fauna. These recommendations would
benefit the majority of SNAs, whether natural or planted.
Planting and site management
To create indigenous ecosystems the initial step is to plant an area in early successional native
species. Initial plantings to create forest in pasture landscapes should be made up of a mixture of
species with an average spacing between plants of one metre. This density provides quick canopy
closure and hence benefits seedling growth through weed suppression (Laughlin and Clarkson 2018).
Some of the previous plantings in the Napier area have been at a lower density, which has resulted
in extra effort for weed control and replanting.
All plants should be eco-sourced from a variety of remnant vegetation seed sources. The aim is to
collect seeds from species growing on the same landform type. The closer the seed source is to the
site the better. However, sourcing from a large number of individual plants is a greater priority than
proximity to site (e.g. aim to collect seed from 100 individuals not two close-by individuals). For
forest ecosystems the later successional plants should be planted 5 - 20 years after early
successional plantings, once herbaceous weed cover is <10%, and microclimate conditions are
suitable (Wallace et al. 2017; Laughlin and Clarkson 2018). Enrichment planting of these late
successional species can ensure succession into a long-lived forest ecosystem and avoid risk of
canopy collapse when early successional species senesce. Further information on forest
restoration/reconstruction is available on the resources tab of the People, Cities & Nature website
(https://www.peoplecitiesnature.co.nz/resources). For freshwater wetlands the Wetland
Restoration handbook is a useful guide (Peters and Clarkson 2010).
The SNA survey indicated that some previously planted species are native to New Zealand but do not
belong in the Napier area. Their presence reduces the ecological fitness of the other indigenous
vegetation and diminishes opportunity to bring back the unique ecosystems representative of the
Napier area. It is also important to retain dead wood and other fallen vegetation within the SNAs
because it increases habitat complexity (e.g. introduces spaces for fauna nesting and habitat for
insects) (Marzluff and Ewing 2001).
Fencing
The exclusion of livestock will reduce vegetation loss and increase biodiversity within SNA sites. It is
important that current sites are protected from further degradation so that the next generation of
forest can regenerate.
Weed removal
Environmental, exotic weeds compete with native plants for habitat and undermine ecological
integrity of the site. Removing weeds with help to protect indigenous biodiversity within the SNA
and reduce the spread of weeds around the district.
Pest control
Removal of possums and rats occurs at some of the SNAs. This should continue and potentially be
expanded. These pests harm indigenous fauna (Innes et al. 2010; Johnstone MacLeod et al, 2015)
and browse vegetation and fruit of indigenous flora. This reduces vegetation regeneration and the
50
food availability for birds and other native fauna (Overdyck et al. 2013; Johnstone MacLeod et al.
2015; Byrom et al. 2016). Pest control can involve trapping and poisons and should be done in
consultation with NCC to make sure it is carried out safely and effectively. There may be a need to
control exotic birds to increase the success of native birds. Control of some exotic birds within the
Hawke’s Bay region has occurred in the past e.g. rooks (Porter, Clapperton and Coleman 2010).
Reducing size of margins
Sites where the ratio of habitat edge to habitat interior area is high (such as narrow linear sites) have
relatively high exposure to environmental and biotic disturbance. Habitats with a low edge to area
ratio tend to have less weed invasion, better habitat microclimate conditions, are more ecologically
rich and complex, and are easier to maintain. This translates that large square or circular sites are
better than narrow linear ones (Young and Mitchell 1994).
Appendix 6:
All completed SNA assessment forms
Appendix to the report:
Napier Significant Natural Areas Assessment
T.S. Cornes, C.L. Kirby, R.L. Johnson, B.D. Clarkson
ERI Report number: xx
Prepared for Napier City Council
Environmental Research Institute
University of Waikato
June 2019
2
Table of Contents Hills .................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Esk Hill 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Esk Hill 2 ......................................................................................................................................................... 9
Esk Hill 3 ....................................................................................................................................................... 15
Esk Hill 4 ....................................................................................................................................................... 19
Esk Hill 5 ....................................................................................................................................................... 23
Esk Hill 6 ....................................................................................................................................................... 28
Esk Hill 7 ....................................................................................................................................................... 32
Esk Hill 8 ....................................................................................................................................................... 36
Esk Hill 9 ....................................................................................................................................................... 40
Esk Hill 10 ..................................................................................................................................................... 44
Esk Hill 11 ..................................................................................................................................................... 48
Esk Hill 12 ..................................................................................................................................................... 52
Kaiangaroa ................................................................................................................................................... 56
Bluff hill (Mataruahou) ................................................................................................................................ 60
Lake Rotokaramu ......................................................................................................................................... 64
Halliwell Reserve 1....................................................................................................................................... 68
Halliwell Reserve 2....................................................................................................................................... 72
Dolbel Reserve 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 76
Dolbel Reserve 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 80
Otatara Park................................................................................................................................................. 85
Otatara Pa 1 ................................................................................................................................................. 89
Otatara Pa 2 ................................................................................................................................................. 93
Otatara Pa 3 ................................................................................................................................................. 97
Saline plain..................................................................................................................................................... 101
Ahuriri Estaury (Upper Ahuriri).................................................................................................................. 101
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report. .................................................................... 107
Ahuriri Estaury (Mid-Ahuriri Estaury) ........................................................................................................ 108
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report. .................................................................... 112
Ahuriri Estaury (Taipo Stream) .................................................................................................................. 113
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report. .................................................................... 116
Ahuriri Estaury (Westshore Reserve Ponds).............................................................................................. 117
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report. .................................................................... 122
Ahuriri Estaury (Westshore Reserve Wetland) .......................................................................................... 123
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report. .................................................................... 126
Ahuriri Estuary (Lower Ahuriri Estuary) ..................................................................................................... 127
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report. .................................................................... 130
3
Bayview Wetland ....................................................................................................................................... 131
Ahuriri Plain Wetland ................................................................................................................................ 137
Embankment Road Wetland ..................................................................................................................... 141
Plains .............................................................................................................................................................. 145
Westshore Reserve Bush ........................................................................................................................... 145
Harakeke Reserve ...................................................................................................................................... 149
SH50 planting............................................................................................................................................. 153
Friend’s Bush ............................................................................................................................................. 157
Coastal ........................................................................................................................................................... 161
Esplanade Herbfield................................................................................................................................... 161
References ..................................................................................................................................................... 165
Field sheets for inventory and quick assessment. Adapted from Ecobase and REA wetland field sheets, and Horizon Regional
Council July 2007. Significance criterea (Source from report of Draft NPSIB 72-76)
4
Hills
Esk Hill 1 Site number: 1
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1933315E, 5631346N Date: 28.2.19
Area m²: 32400.71 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or
pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA) M Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures: Fencing and planting
Fencing (tick one)
No fencing
Some fencing x Mostly fenced
Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Overview
4 Vine/shed
3 Overview
5
Site Map
Site Description
A-B: Kunzea robusta dominant vegetation on one side of gully only (patchy with canopy holes and dieback) and
grass cover with weeds. Other side of this block is a diverse planting with much lower canopy and younger. Kunzea
robusta unit has been used to dump organic plant rubbish.
C: Planted weedy site nearby.
D-F: Gully site dominated by Kunzea robusta canopy. Pasture grass groundcover.
Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating
(1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not
meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Various spp planted on one side
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
6
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area
1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka
forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has
special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 70 Kunzea robusta/pasture grass forest
2 1 A 4 1 30 Mixed podocarp broadleaved forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Kunzea robusta, Melicytus ramiflorus, Coprosma repens, Cordyline australis, Pseudopanax hybrid, Dodonaea
viscosa, Podocarpus totara, Veronica spp, Sophora tetraptera, Myoporum laetum, Pittosporum crassifolium,
Griselinia littoralis, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Pittosporum eugenioides, Piper excelsa, Solanum laciniatum,
Phormium cookianum, Muehlenbecka spp
Rumex sagittatus, thistle, Alocasia brisbanensis, Pinus, Aredera cordifolia, Eucalyptus, Banksia integrifolia,
Agapanthus praecox, Tropaeolum majus, Chamaecytisus proliferus, pasture grass, Conyza spp, Solanum nigrum,
Ginkgo biloba, Carex leporina, Cortaderia selloana, Persea Americana, Lilium formosanum
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. U
nit 1
Un
it 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. √ ☐
7
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐ √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐ ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐ √
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐ ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ √
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
√ ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Quail, fantail, bellbird
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Un
it 1
Un
it 2
Notes for dominant
Species etc
Comments & suggested
management
Ground cover
weeds
1 Very common, cover
>50% ground area. ☐ ☐
Solanum nigrum, Tropaeolum
majus,
Rumex sagittatus
Will be shaded out with closed
canopy
2 Common, 10%-50%
ground area. √ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
ground area. ☐ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50%
canopy cover. ☐ ☐
Aredera cordifolia, Rumex
sagittatus
Poison or pull vine. Take care when
removing tubers to not spread to
other areas 2 Common, 10%50%
canopy cover. √ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
canopy cover. ☐ ☐
4 None present. ☐ √
8
Shrub/Tree
Weeds
1 Very common, <50%
understorey or canopy
cover.
☐ ☐
Pinus, Banksia integrifolia,
Chamaecytisus proliferus, Persea
americana
Drill and poison large trees what
are a seed source
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy
cover.
√ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit
1
Unit
2
Notes
Species etc.
Comments suggested
management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof
prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area. ☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard Or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest /vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
2 Planting Positive Continue
Both Rubbish dumping Negative Stop
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds like Tropaeolum majus. Plant area to link this SNA to other SNA Esk Hill sites. Deter
people from dumping rubbish as it can spread weeds and is a health and safety risk. New native plantings at high
densities to reduce weed invasion.
Notes:
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data:
hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
9
Esk Hill 2 Site number: 2
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932652E, 5631051N Date: 29.2.19
Area m²: 137521.8 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures: Pest control
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
3 Overview
6-9 Weta boxes
10-17
Aerial view
10
Site Map
Site Description
All Esk sites: Esk Hill originally grazed planted a patch each year. Beginning to plant under Kunzea robusta. Large
Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. Resident society owned. 3 to 4 archaeological sites eg
PA. 53 house lots on Esk Hill.
A, C, D, E, G-I: Kunzea robusta canopy with Pyrrosia epiphytes, Microsorum around them on ground. Lot of natural
regeneration of Corynocarpus laevigatus, Piper excelsum and Kunzea robusta. Young planting area joins on,
Ozothamnus leptophyllus mostly and sparse. Extensive planting and under planting undertaken. Soil well drained,
north facing especially. Alectryon excelsus and Podocarpus totara forest relictual according to marie taylor.
Introduced weta. Beginning to see possums. Weasel presence in gully. Four detention dams. limestone faces.
B: Has an exotic broadleaved unit. Lot of Chamaecytisus proliferus at edge and grassy patches. Deeper gully is steep
with Kunzea robusta canopy and grass groundcover. Potentially grazed. High weed presence.
F: Well drained top ridge abundant Kunzea robusta. Lower half and flats covered in Rubus fruticosus. Steep hill
limestone.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating
(1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet
criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Various planted native species
11
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Falcon, weta, Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 2 Phyllocladus trichomainoides
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area
1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka
forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special
ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site 2 Largest Napier City hill site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 15 Kunzea robusta forest
2 1 A 2 2 15 Mixed broadleaved exotic dominated forest
3 1 A 6 1 30 Kunzea robusta/ Piper excelsum- Melicytus ramiflorus forest
4 1 A 2,6 1 10 Kunzea robusta Myoporum laetum / Melicytus ramiflorus forest
5 1 A 12, 6 2 30 Kunzea robusta/ Ulex europaeus forest
12
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Metrosideros excelsa, Cordyline australis, Pseudeopanax crassifolius, Sophora tetraptera, Dodonaea viscosa,
Podocarpus totara, Hoheria populnea, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Pittosporum crassifolium, Pittosporum
eugenioides, Phormium cookianum, Alectryon excelsus, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Coprosma robusta, Piper
excelsum, Pseudopanax hybrid, Veronica spp. cultivars, Pteris macilenta, Veronica stricta, Sophora microphylla,
Griselinia littoralis, Microsorum pustulatum, Melicytus ramiflorus, Knightia excelsa, Pyrrosia eleagnifolia,
Muehlenbeckia australis, Beilschmiedia tarairi, Melicope ternata, Hedycarya arborea, Hoheria sexstylosa,
Pseudopanax ferox, Pseudopanax crassifolius, Dacrydium cupressinum, Carpodetus serratus, Cyathea medullaris,
Prumnopitys ferruginea, Typha orientalis, Myoporum laetum, Coprosma spathulata, Ripogonum scandens,
Coprosma crassifolia, Myrsine australis, Pseudopanax arboreus, Brachyglottis repanda, Aristotelia serrata,
Ozothamnus leptophyllus, Phormium tenax, Austroderia spp, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Coprosma propinqua,
Plagianthus regius, Nestegis montana, Prumnopitys taxifolia, Rhopalostylis sapida, coprosma grandifolia,
Phyllocladus trichomanoides, Pellaea rotundifolia, passiflora tetranda, Cyperus ustulatus, Teucrium parvifolium,
Blechnum parrisiae
Chamaecytisus proliferus, Pasture grass, Agapanthus praecox, Olea spp, Solanum nigrum, Eucalyptus spp, Rubus
fruticosus, Malus x domestica, Pinus spp, Callistemon spp, Ficus carica, Laurus nobilus, Thistle, Phytolacca octandra,
Pteridium esculentum, Actinidia spp, Paspalum dilatatum, Solanum linnaeanum, Ulex europaeus,
Foeniculum vulgare, Berberis vulgaris, Prunus Americana, Verbena bonariensis, Chichorium intybus, Carex leporina,
Pinus spp
Vegetation condition
Rating
information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit
1
Unit
2
Unit
3
Unit
4
Unit 5
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Canopy
condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐ √ √ √ √
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very
occasional dieback.
√ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less
palatable species. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ √
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively
abundant. ☐ √ ☐ ☐ ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐ ☐ √ √ ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings
etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder
of forest floor. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
13
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf
litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐ √ √ ☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%.
Leaf letter on remainder.
√ √ ☐ ☐ √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Sparrow, bellbird, falcon, harrier, blackbird, tūī, fernbird, morepork, quail, fantail, kereru, weta
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate
level)
Unit
1
Unit
2
Unit
3
Unit
4
Unit
5
Notes for dominant
Species etc
Comments &
suggested
management
Ground
cover weeds
1 Very common,
cover >50%
ground area.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Solanum nigrum Phytolacca
octandra, Foeniculum
vulgare, Rubus fruticosus
Spray Rubus from
open areas. Other
species should die
under a closed canopy
2 Common, 10%-
50% ground area. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ √
3 Occasional, up to
10% ground area.
√ √ √ √ ☐
4 None present. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common,
>50% canopy
cover.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Actinidia, Rubus fruticosus Remove from open
areas
2 Common,
10%50% canopy
cover.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ √
3 Occasional, up to
10% canopy
cover.
☐ √ √ √ ☐
4 None present. √ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Shrub/Tree
Weeds
1 Very common,
<50%
understorey or
canopy cover.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Chamaecytisus proliferus,
Ficus, Ulex europaeus, Prunus
americana, Pinus
Remove self-seeding
species. Drill and
poison trees
2 Common, 10%-
50% understorey
or canopy cover.
☐ √ ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to
10% understorey
or canopy cover.
☐ ☐ √ √ √
4 None present. √ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
14
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit
1
Unit
2
Unit
3
Unit
4
Unit
5
Notes
Species
etc.
Comments
suggested
management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major
tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or
seen throughout area.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes
scattered. Occasional stock heard or seen,
confined to scattered areas on edge.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only
near edges. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √ √ √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Potentially grazed Negative Fence from stock
Pest management: 100 bs doc200s Positive Continue
Nest boxes for weta Positive Continue
Planting Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fence area from stock as currently natural regeneration is begin suppressed. Remove ecological weeds. Continue
pest control. Plant trees at higher densities to create a closed canopy.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data:
hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
15
Esk Hill 3
Site number: 3
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932211.75E, 5631140N Date: 1.3.19
Area m²: 14263.4 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased √ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA) x Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures: Fencing (tick one) √ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Overview of mixed unit
2/7
Kunzea robusta behind mixed unit
3
Grass area
Site Map
16
Site Description
Very dense forest patch dominated by Kunzea robusta. Has a closed canopy and is likely to be pest managed. Has been under planted. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. An open grass turf area separated sections of the block.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating
(1,2) Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2
Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Some diversity of indigenous spp
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 2 Pittosporum ralphii
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 80 Kunzea robusta forest
2 1 A 2 1 20 Sophora - mixed broadleaved forest
17
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Kunzea robusta, Pittosporum eugenioides, Phormium cookianum, Myoporum laetum, Coprosma repens, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Pittosporum crassifolium, Coprosma robusta, Dodonaea viscosa, Pteris macilenta, Cordyline australis, Corokia x cheesemanii, Arthropodium cirratum, Coprosma hybrid, Pittosporum ralphii, Melicytus ramiflorus, Ozothamnus leptophyllus, Sophora tetraptera, Leptospermum scoparium, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Alectryon excelsus, Pseudopanax arboreus, Rhopalostylis sapida, Piper excelsum, Carex spp
Pasture grass, Paspalum dilatatum, Solanum nigrum, Thistle
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1 Unit 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐ ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐ √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. √ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐ ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐ √
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐ ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ √
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
√ ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Thrush, tūī, blackbird, silvereye, harrier
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Notes for dominant
Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐ Solanum nigrum thistle
Paspalum dilatatum Will be shaded out by a closed
canopy over time 2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐ ☐
18
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. ☐ √
4 None present. √ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √
Pest animals If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof
prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area. ☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Planting Positive Increase
Likely pest managed Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant in canopy gaps. Underplant shade tolerant species in areas of dense canopy. Where possible plant to connect this site with other Esk Hill sites. Continue pest management.
Note
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
19
Esk Hill 4
Site number: 4
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932283.875E, 5630993N Date: 28.2.19
Area m²: 4491.65 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
x No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) √ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
2/3
Site view general
Site Map
20
Site Description
Young block at Esk Hill Road, well established. Is on private property near houses on a small rise. Dead pine present among shrubland.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating
(1,2) Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 2 Pittosporum ralphii
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation left on the hills in Napier City.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 2 1 100 Mixed broadleaved shrubland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.) Phormium cookianum, Sophora tetraptera, Austroderia spp, Kunzea robusta, Leptospermum scoparium, Pittosporum ralphii, Coprosma robusta, Corokia x cheesemanii, Pteris tremula, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Pittosporum eugenioides, Cordyline australis, Melicytus ramiflorus, Veronica stricta, Dodonaea viscosa, Hoheria angustifolia Pasture grass, Cotoneaster glaucophyllus, Pinus spp, thistle, Solanum nigrum, Conyza spp
21
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. √
Fauna Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Fantail
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Solanum nigrum Will be shaded out with canopy closure
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Cotoneaster glaucophyllus pinus
Cut or drill and poison
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
22
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Planting
Pest plant control
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Plant to reduce exposed margins. Plant to connect SNA to others.
Notes
23
Esk Hill 5
Site number: 5
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932206E, 5630895N Date: 29.2.19
Area m²: 26210.1 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased √ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA) M Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
General overview of vegetation
2/3
Pond/ecotone
24
Site Map
Site Description
Kunzea robusta canopy. There is a small pond/lake in the site with ecotones from raupō and Lemna in water and grasses and Carex around edge. SNA terrain is a mix of flats and steep gully. A walkway runs through. Planting has begun under Kunzea robusta canopy. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. High Solanum nigrum presence. Pest managed.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating
(1,2) Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2
Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 High spp diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences 2 Sedge and grass to Typha orientalis and Lemna
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 2 Pittosporum ralphii
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2 Small wetland present
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
25
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 90 Kunzea robusta/ Piper excelsum forest
2 4 B 24 25 23 1 10 Typha orientalis/ Paspalum distichum Carex spp wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Myoporum laetum, Pyrrosia eleagnifolia, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Blechnum parrisiae, Microsorum pustulatum, Griselinia littoralis, Veronica stricta, Asplenium polyodon, Muehlenbeckia australis, Dicksonia squarrosa, Pittosporum eugenioides, Pittosporum ralphii, Piper excelsum, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Pteris tremula, Melicytus ramiflorus, Plagianthus regius, Podocarpus totara, Cyathea dealbata, Brachyglottis repanda, Coprosma robusta, Phormium cookianum, Kunzea robusta, Dodonaea viscosa, Cordyline australis, Sophora tetraptera, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Nestegis montana, Nestegis cunninghamii, Prumnopitys taxifolia, Helichrysum lanceolatum, Typha orientalis, Lemna spp, Cyperus ustulatus, Polystichum richardii, Veronica spp. cultivar
Solanum nigrum, Verbena bonariensis, Paspalum distichum, pasture grasses, Foeniculum vulgare, Pinus radiata, Rubus fruticosus, Erigeron karvinskianus, Helminthotheca echioides
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit.
Unit 1 Unit 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐ ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √ √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐ ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐ ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. √ √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
√ ☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
☐ √
26
Wetland/Estuary Unit:2
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake √ Shallow water <2m √
Swamp ☐ Marsh ☐ Fen☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √
Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system?
Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes☐ No √ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity
Clear ☐ Water Quality
Algal blooms ☐ Pollution ☐
Translucent ☐
Opaque √
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation
Sedge/grass 60 Herbs 40 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation
Sedge/grass 100 Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte %
OBL 35 FACW 20 FAC 25 FACU 20 UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring √ surface flows ☐ stream/river ☐ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland Wetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Fantail, chaffinch, blackbird, dragonfly, tūī
Threats Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Notes for dominant species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐ ☐
Erigeron karvinskianus Spray
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area.
√ √
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐ ☐
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐ ☐
Rubus fruticosus Spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. √ ☐
4 None present. ☐ √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
Pinus Remove any seedlings
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey
or canopy cover. √ ☐
4 None present. ☐ √
Pest animals
27
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area. ☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √
Human Associated Activities (Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Pest managed Positive Continue
Planting Positive Continue at higher densities
Dogs off leash Neutral
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant in canopy gaps to close the canopy. Underplant dense canopy areas with shade tolerant species. Continue pest control. Plant areas between other Esk Hill sites to increase connectivity. Plant wetland species in and around the pond.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
28
Esk Hill 6
Site number: 6
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932870E, 5630734N Date: 1.3.19
Area m²: 2723.15 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
x No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) √ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
3/4
Mixed broadleaf unit
2
Kunzea robusta unit
Site Map
29
Site Description
Development planting of a previously grazed site. Species diverse however there is a lot of bare ground. Broadleaved mix with lot of exotics. 2nd unit is native with grass groundcover. Some Kunzea robusta regeneration is present among grasses.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating
(1,2) Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2
Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Planted, species diverse
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2
<1% native vegetation left on the hills within the Naiper City boundary. Contains some remnant Kunzea.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 a 2 2 60 Mixed native-exotic broadleaved forest
2 1 a 6 2 1 40 Mixed broadleaved- Kunzea robusta forest
30
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Griselinia littoralis, Coprosma repens, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Pittosporum eugenioides, Coprosma hybrid, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Pittosporum crassifolium, Veronica stricta, Cordyline australis, Myoporum laetum, Pittosporum ralphii, Coprosma robusta, Kunzea robusta, Phormium tenax, Dodonaea viscosa, Phormium cookianum cultivar
Callistemon spp, Hydrangea macrophylla, Acer spp, Agapanthus praecox, pasture grass
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1 Unit 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐ ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback.
√ √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species.
☐ ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. √ √
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐ ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
√ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
☐ √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Thrush, tūī, sparrow
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐
Agapanthus praecox Spray or had remove
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. √ ☐
4 None present. ☐ √
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √
31
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
Hydrangea, Acer spp, cultivars
Remove if reproducing
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey
or canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. √ ☐
4 None present. ☐ √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Weed management Posiitve Continue
Planting Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fence from stock. Underplant exotic dominant areas with naitves. Plant to reduce margins and connect to other SNA sites.
Notes
32
Esk Hill 7
Site number: 7
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932643E, 5630451N Date: 28.2.19
Area m²: 86138.1 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased √ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal m Reserve (TA) m Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos Mark photo points on map with a cross. Indicate direction of photographs taken with arrow.
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
3
Weedy entrance
1
Carex/unit 2
Site Map
33
Site Description
This block is all built up planting, with Kunzea robusta the dominant species. High amount of weeds at the entry. There is a poorly drained gully at the bottom with rush and sedgeland (Unit 2). Drainage ditches are present. A walking track runs through starting at pavilion. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. Rabbit seen.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Diverse planting of species
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site 2 Second largest hill site in Napier City
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 90 Kunzea robusta /Pteris tremula forest
2 5 B 23 24 1 10 Kunzea robusta / Carex spp- Cyperus ustulatus- Juncus pallidus forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Dodonaea viscosa, Sophora tetraptera, Coprosma robusta, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Kunzea robusta, Podocarpus totara, Veronica stricta, Cordyline australis, Carex secta, Carex geminata, Pittosporum eugenioides, Plagianthus regius, Pteris tremula, Carpodetus serratus, Coprosma areolata, Piper excelsum, Myoporum laetum, Solanum laciniatum, Alectryon excelsus, Melicytus ramiflorus, Brachyglottis repanda, Pseudopanax lessonii, Myrsine australis, Nestegis montana, Sophora microphylla, Prumnopitys taxifolia, Elaeocarpus dentatus, Melicope ternata,
34
Muehlenbeckia spp, Juncus pallidus, Phormium cookianum, Hoheria angustifolia, Cyperus ustulatus, Coprosma hybrid
Conyza spp, thistle, pasture grasses, Paspalum dilatatum, Cichorium intybus, Foeniculum vulgare, Verbena bonariensis, Solanum nigrum, Helminthotheca echioides
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1 Unit 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐ ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √ ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ √
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐ ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐ ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. √ √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
√ √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Fantail, greywarbler, quails, rabbit
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐
Thistle Verbena bonariensis Cichorium intybus Solanum
nigrum
Planting to close canopy should eliminate these
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. √ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
ground area. ☐ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
canopy cover. ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
35
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage.
√ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Pruning around paths Negative Limit
Planting Positive Continue
Pest management Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Pruning of plants could be limited to only when plants are creating a hazard along paths. Continue pest management. Plant in canopy gaps to reduce weeds. Plant around the margins of the site to connect blocks within the SNA and this site to other Esk Hill sites.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
36
Esk Hill 8
Site number: 8
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932386E, 5630643N Date: 28.2.19
Area m² : 4797.61 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
x No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) √ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos Mark photo points on map with a cross. Indicate direction of photographs taken with arrow.
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1/2
Site overview
Site Map
37
Site Description
Young block at Heipipi Drive, well established. Is on private property near houses on a small rise. Mixed broadleaved shrubs to small trees.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
(Source from report of Draft NPSIB 72-76)
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Diverse but has Metrosideros excelsa and cultivars
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 2 Pittosporum ralphii
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation left on the hills in Napier City.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 11 1 100 Mixed broadleaved shrubland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Sophora tetraptera, Kunzea robusta, Cordyline australis, Phormium cookianum, Pittosporum eugenioides, Dodonaea viscosa, Coprosma robusta, Veronica stricta, Hoheria angustifolia, Hoheria populnea, Leptospermum scoparium, Meryta sinclairii, Podocarpus totara, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Metrosideros excelsa, Rhopalostylis sapida, Griselinia lucida, Melicytus ramiflorus, Alectryon excelsus, Plagianthus regius, Pittosporum crassifolium, Aristotelia serrata, Coprosma repens, Pittosporum ralphii, Veronica spp. cultivar
Pasture grass, garden variety shrubs at edges by properties
38
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
√
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Fantail
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐
4 None present. √
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
39
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Planting Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant canopy gaps densely. Plant to connect SNA to others on Esk Hill.
Notes
40
Esk Hill 9
Site number: 9
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932194E, 5630623N Date: 29.2.19
Area m²: 18050.06 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA) M Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known): only temporary electric
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos Mark photo points on map with a cross. Indicate direction of photographs taken with arrow.
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Overview of canopy and grass
2
Overview and stock fence
41
Site Map
Site Description
Kunzea robusta canopy dominates. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. Bare understorey throughout and pasture grass ground cover only. Currently has stock in it and temporary electric fence is up. Pest managed. Young plantings around the edge of the site.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of are 1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
42
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 Kunzea robusta forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Kunzea robusta, Melicytus ramiflorus, Piper excelsum
Pasture grass, Rubus fruticosus
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Tūī
43
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐
4 None present. √
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
Rubus fruticosus Spray to remove
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
√ Stock
present Fence off
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. ☐
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Pest managed Positive Continue
Grazed Negative Fence to remove stock
Plantings Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Build a permanent fence to eliminate stock from the site. Plant within canopy gaps to close the canopy. Plant around the margins and between stands to reduce the area exposed to external conditions. Increase planting density in current plantings. Plant to connect to other Esk Hill sites. Continue pest management.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
44
Esk Hill 10
Site number: 10
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932899E, 5630609N Date: 1.3.19
Area m²: 20849.66 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA) x Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
√ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos Mark photo points on map with a cross. Indicate direction of photographs taken with arrow.
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
2
Overview with weeds
8
Kunzea robusta over grass
4/5
Track
9
Gully with Rubus fruticosus
45
Site Map
Site Description Canopy is sparse and dominated by Kunzea robusta. There is a gully in the middle. Very weedy especially high presence of Rubus fruticosus. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. Steep banks either side. High fantail presence noted.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2) Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet
criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
46
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
% Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 2 1 100 Kunzea robusta forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Muehlenbeckia spp, Austroderia spp, Kunzea robusta, Coprosma robusta, Ripogonum scandens, Pteris tremula, Pseudopanax hybrid, Veronica stricta
Rubus fruticosus, Verbena bonariensis, Ulex europaeus, Foeniculum vulgare, Anredera cordifolia, Cotoneaster glaucophyllus, Conyza spp, Pinus spp, Paspalum dilatatum, Helminthotheca echioides, Crataegus monogyna, Aredera cordifolia
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. √
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. √
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. √
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Sparrow, pheasant, fantail, blackbird
47
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Foeniculum vulgare Rubus fruticosus
Spray Rubus.
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. √
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐
Rubus fruticosus Anredera cordifolia
Spray vines. Hand remove Anredera where possible.
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. √
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Ulex europaeus Cotoneaster glaucophyllus Pinus
Drill and poison Pinus and Cotoneaster
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey
or canopy cover. √
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges.
☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Planting Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fence area from stock. Plant around the margins of the site to connect blocks within the SNA and this site to other Esk Hill sites. Remove ecological weeds.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
48
Esk Hill 11
Site number: 11
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932289E, 5630438N Date: 28.2.19
Area m²: 7667.38 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased √ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal x Reserve (TA) x Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) √ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos.
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Asparagus scandens
2
Inside site, Kunzea robusta over grass cover
3
Overview of site
Site Map
49
Site Description
Well-established canopy of Kunzea robusta in the gully with grass groundcover. No understorey present. Asparagus scandens is present. Lot of Foeniculum vulgare at entry. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. Underplanting would benefit this SNA. Opposite is a young hillside planting.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Kunzea dominant early successional forest
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it
Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 100 Kunzea robusta forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Pteris tremula, Kunzea robusta, Pseudopanax hybrid, Coprosma robusta
Foeniculum vulgare, thistle, pasture grass, Hedera helix, Nephrolepis cordifolia, Rubus fruticosus, Solanum nigrum, Asparagus scandens, Aredera cordifolia, Carex leporina
50
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. √
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. √
Fauna Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Blackbird
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Foeniculum vulgare Solanum nigrum
Will be shaded out with a closed canopy.
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
Asparagus scandens Anredera cordifolia
Cut, spray and dig out tubers
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey
or canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
51
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 planted Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Densely plant to fill canopy gaps.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
52
Esk Hill 12
Site number: 12
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932521E, 5629916N Date: 29.2.19
Area m²: 16461.18 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA) x Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions √ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
√ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos Mark photo points on map with a cross. Indicate direction of photographs taken with arrow.
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Overview
2
Big pine and entrance
Site Map
53
Site Description
Kunzea robusta dominated hillside, with some grassland above hill rd. Some limestone exposed throughout. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted.
B: High Pinus presence with young Pinus around. Plantation of Pinus behind. Cortaderia selloana and grass around the site. Orchard on other side of road
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Contains some remnant Kunzea in canopy
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1
<1% native vegetation left on the hills and one of few remaning kānuka forest remnants within the Naiper City boundary.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other SNA Esk Hill sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 100 Pinus/Kunzea robusta forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Kunzea robusta, Sophora microphylla, Sophora tetraptera, Coprosma robusta
Pinus spp, Calystegia sylvatica, Rubus fruticosus, Chamaecytisus proliferus, Cortaderia selloana, pasture grass
54
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. √
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. √
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. √
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Sparrows, harrier
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Calystegia silvatica Rubus fruticosus Cortaderia selloana
Hand remove or spray
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐
Rubus fruticosus Calystegia silvatica
Hand remove or spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Pinus spp Chamaecytisus proliferus Cut or drill and poison
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey
or canopy cover. √
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
55
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Chopped pines Positive Need to make sure gaps are replanted
1 Planting Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Connect blocks by planting. Fully fence from stock. Plant canopy gaps densely. Plant to connect to other Esk Hill SNA.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
56
Kaiangaroa
Site number: 13
Recorder: MC, RJ, BC Grid Ref/GPS: 1932238E, 5629198N Date: 1.3.19
Area m²: 5300.05 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled m No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced √ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Adjoining young planting
2
Tallest Myoporum laetum
3/4/5/6
Overview
Site Map
57
Site Description
Planted hillside with 7m tallest trees. Adjoining is a much younger planting. Veronica speciosa is in road reserve nearby only 1. A walking path runs the full length of the SNA.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A – Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 2 Planted Pittosporum ralphii
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 11 1 100 Mixed broadleaved shrubland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Pittosporum ralphii, Sophora tetraptera, Kunzea robusta, Ozothamnus leptophyllus, Phormium cookianum, Myoporum laetum, Coprosma repens, Dodonaea viscosa, Pittosporum crassifolium, Olearia solandri, Hoheria angustifolia, Austroderia spp, Leptospermum scoparium, Rhopalostylis sapida
Solanum nigrum, pasture grass
58
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. x
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. x
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. x
Fauna Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Blackbird
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
Solanum nigrum Will be shaded out when canopy closes
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
59
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
planting Positive Continue
Managed area Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant natives at higher density to close canopy. Try to connect to other SNA sites by planting.
Notes
60
Bluff hill (Mataruahou)
Site number: 19
Recorder: MC, RJ, TC, CK Grid Ref/GPS: 1936899E, 5622698N Date: 26.02.19
Area m²: 9196.37 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) √ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures: Pest control
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
√ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos Mark photo points on map with a cross. Indicate direction of photographs taken with arrow.
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description 1
Vegetation regeneration
2
Underplanting 3/4/5
Vegetation/overview
15
Concrete stream
Site Map
61
Site Description
Native forest bush patch surrounded by exotic vegetation in a steep gully. Walking track runs through the site. Upper and lower areas have had grass maintenance. There is some planting of natives along the concrete. Other bank along drain is weedy. Planted Veronica and Agathis australis along track. Natural regeneration of Piper excelsum and Corynocarpus laevigatus. Pest management poisoning in area. Pampas at edge of surveyed area.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA Significance criteria Rating
(1,2) Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Has old native trees. However, Metrosideros excelsa, Agathis australis
and Vitex lucens are outside distribution limit
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Various native plant species but not all native to the area
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 3 A 2 1 100 Mixed broadleaved forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Meryta sinclairii, Myoporum laetum, Phormium tenax, Cordyline australis, Alectryon excelsus, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Metrosideros excelsa, Podocarpus totara, Piper excelsum, Arthropodium cirratum, Pseudopanax ferox, Melicope ternata, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Kunzea robusta, Pittosporum eugenioides, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Coprosma repens, Dodonaea viscosa, Myrsine australis, Melicytus ramiflorus, Sophora microphylla, Veronica spp,
62
Hoheria sexstylosa, Sophora tetraptera, Agathis australis, Beilschmiedia tawa, Asplenium bulbiferum, Pteris tremula, Hedycarya arborea, Cyathea dealbata, Dacrydium cupressinum, Vitex lucens, Rhopalostylis sapida, Pittosporum crassifolium, Griselinia littoralis, Pseudopanax hybrid, Cyathea medullaris, Hoheria populnea, Entelea arborescens
Chamaecytisus proliferus, Cotoneaster glaucophyllus, Hedera helix, Conyza spp, Eriobotrya japonica, Acacia spp, Robinia pseudoacacia, Eucalyptus spp, Tradescantia fluminensis, Trachycarpus fortunei, Delairea odorata, Crassula spp, Populus alba, Cortaderia selloana at border Piptatherum miliaceum
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. √
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Tūi, kereru, bellbird, fantail, sparrow, Kaka visiting – anecdotal
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Hedera helix, Tradescantia fluminensis, Crassula spp
Cut and poison ivy Hand remove T. fluminensis and
Crassula
2 Common, 10%-50%
ground area. √
3 Occasional, up to 10%
ground area. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐
Hedera helix, Delairea odorata Cut and poison ivies
2 Common, 10%50%
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ Cotoneaster glaucophyllus,
Trachycarpus fortuna, Chamaecytisus proliferus, Robinia pseudoacacia
Hand remove or poison. Trees can be kept standing if no danger to the public
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover.
√
63
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover.
☐
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Mowing grass negative Stop mowing inside SNA
1 Pruning negative Stop pruning away from paths
1 Planting Positive Increase planting to close canopy
1 Pest control Positive Continue pest control
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Increased planting to create a closed forest canopy. Stop mowing the area. Plant natives into the connected exotic dominant areas to increase size and connectivity. Remove environmental weeds. Investigate reducing the amount of concrete in the area.
Notes
64
Lake Rotokaramu
Site number: 20
Recorder: MC, RJ, TC, CK Grid Ref/GPS: 1929034E, 5621904N Date: 26.2.19
Area m²: 37171.9 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) ☐ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased √ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
x No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing √ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions √ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture √ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
7/8
Margin/fence/maimai
1/2/6/10/17/18
Overview of lake
3
Grey heron/Eleocharis
Site Map
65
Site Description
Non-draining Peat wetland - lot of Lemna, Eleocharis sedge and Typha orientalis common in water. 30 percent vegetation is Eleocharis. Juncus and pasture weeds, willows present in and out. Ricciocarpos natans- Nationally endangered present. No fish – anecdotal. Drained 1920 and cleared by digger. 99% private owned on Napier City boundary side. Potential for willow removal. Some parts protected.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 1 Eleocharis Typha orientalis
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals 1 Freshwater wetland birds present
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Various wetland species
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 1 Ricciocarpos natans
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 The largest freshwater wetland in the city
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2 Wetland
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Future link / corridor as well as current link
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 5 B 22 23 25 2 100 Eleocharis sphacelata- Typha orientalis-Juncus wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, under
Typha orientalis, Kunzea robusta, Glossostigma elatinoides, Ricciocarpos natans (threatened), Eleocharis sphacelata, Lemna, Azolla
Paspalam distichum, pasture weeds, Salix fragilis, Salix cinerea, Rubus fruticosus, Crataegus monogyna, Juncus spp, Ulex europaeus, Persicaria maculosa
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake √ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
66
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity
Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms √ Pollution √
Translucent ☐
Opaque √
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 20 Herbs 0 Shrubs 0 Trees 5
Wetland margin vegetation
Sedge/grass 90 Herbs 5 Shrubs 0 Trees 5 Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 50 FACW 25 FAC 25 FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover % 5 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch x continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover % 90 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous x
Source of water: spring √ surface flows ☐ stream/river ☐ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Agricultural activity
Grazed
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Pukeko, swallow, sparrow, tūī, harrier, spoonbill, dabchick, grey teal, bittern, white-faced heron, fantail, shag, mallard, Australian shoveller, brown teal, blackbird, rail, Nz dragonfly, Green and golden bell frog
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
No pest weeds
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
Rubus fruticosus Spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Salix spp Drill and poison
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. √
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
67
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Maimai duck hut Neutral
1 Grazing on the other side Negative Exclude stock from SNA
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fully fence SNA from stock. Plant margins to increase site and provide and ecotone from wetland to forest. Remove ecological weeds.
Notes
68
Halliwell Reserve 1
Site number: 23
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1930359E, 5618128N Date: 2.3.19
Area m²: 11338.8 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) √ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal X Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) open gate ☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced √ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
4-6
Overview
1
Passionfruit vine
3
Dacrycarpus dacrydioides dominated
Site Map
69
Site Description
Totally planted in 2012, very species diverse. Dacrycarpus dacrydioides dominated in low flatter area, 6 to 8 metre trees. No areas of closed canopy. Pinus plantation behind which may be potential problem. Gardens are at the edges with exotics.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Species diverse. Flat area kahikatea dominant
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Planted various
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation left on the hills in Napier City.
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it
Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 4 1 100 Mixed broadleaved-Dacrycarpus dacrydioides forest.
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Pittosporum eugenioides, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Phormium tenax, Dacrydium cupressinum, Austroderia spp, Cordyline australis, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Pseudopanax hybrid, Coprosma robusta, Carpodetus serratus, Podocarpus totara, Hoheria sexstylosa, Myoporum laetum, Melicytus ramiflorus, Sophora microphylla, Phormium cookianum, Coprosma repens, Leptospermum scoparium, Kunzea robusta, Alectryon excelsus, Hoheria sexstylosa, Dodonaea viscosa, Veronica stricta, Sophora tetraptera, Pittosporum ralphii, Knightia excelsa
Rubus fruticosus, Paspalum dilatatum, Passiflora caerulea, Rumex sagittatus, Lolium arundinaceum, Foeniculum vulgare, Prunus spp, Calystegia sylvatica, pasture grass
70
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. √
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Fantail, silvereye, tūī, blackbird
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Lolium arundinaceum Rubus fruticosus Foeniculum vulgare
Spray Rubus. Others die under canopy shade
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐
Passiflora caerulea Calystegia silvatica Rubus fruticosus
Spray Rubus. Others had remove and poison stumps.
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. √
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Prunus Drill and poison if reproducing
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
71
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area. ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Planted Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Plant natives denser. Try to plant to join to other Halliwell SNA.
Notes
72
Halliwell Reserve 2
Site number: 24
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1930353.125E, 5617860N Date: 2.3.19
Area m²: 12149.2 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) open gate
☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing √ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
6/7
Overview
1-3
Younger plantings
Site Map
73
Site Description
Totally planted in 2012. Surrounded by gardens. Some young plants at top and within. Lower than Halliwell 1, 6m height trees. Upper vegetation only reaches 1 to 3m. Terrain is a steep hill.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Contains mixed broadleaved with coastal species
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Planting is species diverse. However, Metrosideros excelsa, Fuscospora
fusca, Agathis australis and Vitex lucens are outside distribution limit
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 11 1 100 Mixed broadleaved-podocarp shrubland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Coprosma robusta, Alectryon excelsus, Podocarpus totara, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Sophora tetraptera, Knightia excelsa, Plagianthus regius, Dodonaea viscosa, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Pittosporum ralphii, Pennantia corymbosa, Olearia solandri, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Pittosporum eugenioides, Dacrydium cupressinum, Phormium tenax, Metrosideros excelsa, Cordyline australis, Sophora microphylla, Pseudopanax hybrid, Kunzea robusta, Myoporum laetum, Leptospermum scoparium, Pittosporum crassifolium, Melicope ternata, Agathis australis, Vitex lucens, Beilschmiedia tawa, Entelea arborescens, Veronica stricta, Sophora prostrata, Pseudopanax arboreus, Fuscospora fusca, Myrsine australis
Paspalum dilatatum, Hedera helix, pasture grass, Convolvulus arvensis, Solanum nigrum
74
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Blackbird, harrier
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Pasture grass Solanum nigrum
Will be shaded out in time
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
Hedera helix Convolvulus arvensis
Hand remove and spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
75
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage.
√
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Planted Positive Continue
Pest animal control Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Plant natives at higher densities. Try to plant to connect to other SNA sites.
Notes
76
Dolbel Reserve 1
Site number: 26
Recorder: MC, RJ, TC, CK Grid Ref/GPS: 1929564E, 5616892N Date: 26.2.19
Area m²: 22173.7 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) √ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures: Planting, has care group
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing √ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
√ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture √ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
2
Stile into site
3
Track and vegetation
4/6
Character of canopy
Site Map
77
Site Description
Fenced native broadleaved forest with some sections of closed canopy. Walking tracks run through the forest. Adjacent patch of young planted native trees. Natural regeneration of Dacrycarpus dacrydioides and Dodonaea viscosa. Large Kunzea robusta are natural secondary growth, not planted. Clianthus maximus (threatened – nationally critical) is planted.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Broadleaved native forest. However, Vitex lucens, Fuscospora fusca, Agathis
australis and Metrosideros excelsa are outside distribution range
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 High planted species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 2 1 100 Mixed broadleaved forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Coprosma repens, Cordyline australis, Rhopalostylis sapida, Podocarpus totara, Agathis australis, Pittosporum eugenioides, Dacrydium cupressinum, Alectryon excelsus, Dodonaea viscosa, Pseudopanax hybrid, Cyathea dealbata, Hoheria sexstylosa, Pteris tremula, Melicytus ramiflorus, Poa spp, Prumnopitys taxifolia, Myrsine australis, Astelia spp, Myoporum laetum, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Sophora microphylla, Veronica spp, Coprosma robusta, Pittosporum crassifolium, Clianthus maximus, Griselinia littoralis, Fuscospora fusca, Metrosideros excelsa, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Vitex lucens, Kunzea robusta, Piper excelsum, Veronica stricta, Pseudopanax discolor, Leptospermum scoparium, Olearia solandri, Elaeocarpus dentatus, Sophora prostrata, Carpodetus serratus, Ripogonum scandens, Sophora tetraptera, Corokia x cheesemanii, Arthropodium cirratum, Melicope ternata, Phormium tenax cultivar. Nephrolepis cordifolia, Conyza spp, Iris spp Abies spp, pasture grass, Persea americana, Solanum nigrum
78
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
√
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Fantail, tūī, blackbird, silvereye, sparrow, myna
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
Nephrolepis cordifolia
Hand removal
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Persea americana No action needed if not reproducing
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
79
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Dogs off leash Neutral
Walking track Positive Increase plantings along walking track
Planting Positive Continue planting
Pruning Negative Only prune if plantings interfering with safety along walkway
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Increased and denser planting of ecologically appropriate species to reduce weeds and help develop the forest to become humid enough for later successional species. Fully fence from stock. Remove ecological weeds like Nephrolepis cordifolia. Plant along hill to connect Dolbel sites.
Notes
80
Dolbel Reserve 2 Site number: 27
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1929510E, 5616582N Date: 27.2.19
Area m²: 24591.63 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures: planting. Has care group
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced √ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
√ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture √ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Plantings
2
Adjacent pasture land
3
Forest overview
4
Entrance
7 Path and vegetation
8 Perimeter
10 Fenceline
81
Site Map
Site Description
A: Young planted forest with younger plantings within. Steep hillside with low canopy surrounded by
park/farmland. Species diverse. Exotic specimen trees ie oak in nearby land. Walking track through. Young planting
is adjoining the SNA.
B: Native planting on steep hillside, species diverse. Surrounded by agriculture and parkland. Closed canopy in
centre. Piper excelsum natural regeneration in places. Pseudopanax laetus planted. Track through middle. Oak
regeneration in some places.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Diverse native plantings but not all species native to the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 High diversity but Metrosideros excelsa, Fuscospora truncata and Vitex lucens are outside distribution range
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
82
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area
2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it
Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 2 1 100 Mixed broadleaved forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Corynocarpus laevigatus, Dodonaea viscosa, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Sophora microphylla, Pittosporum
tenuifolium, Alectryon excelsus, Pittosporum eugenioides, Melicytus ramiflorus, Pittosporum crassifolium, sophora
tetraptera, Vitex lucens, Pseudopanax hybrid, Coprosma robusta, Melicope ternata, Cordyline australis, Fuscospora
truncata, pseudopanax discolor, Beilschmiedia tawa, Phormium tenax, Pseudopanax arboreus, Podocarpus totara,
Brachyglottis repanda, Rhopalostylis sapida, Carpodetus serratus, Leptospermum scoparium, Coprosma repens,
Kunzea robusta, Veronica stricta, Dacrydium cupressinum, Aristotelia serrata, Entelea arborescens, Hoheria
populnea, Knightia excelsa, Metrosideros robusta, Pteris tremula, Piper excelsum, Hoheria sexstylosa, Dicksonia
squarrosa, Corokia x cheesemanii, Prumnopitys taxifolia, Metrosideros excelsa, Pseudopanax laetus, Pseudowintera
colorata, Veronica spp. Cultivar. Pasture grasses, thistles, Solanum nigrum, Conyza spp, Prunus spp, Rubus
fruticosus, Tradescantia fluminensis, Pastinaca sativa, Cupressaceae spp, Agapanthus praecox, Lilium formosanum,
Eucalyptus spp.
83
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. √
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Fantail, kereru, silvereye, sparrow, blackbird
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ Tradescantia fluminensis, Agapanthus praecox, Lilium formosanum
Hand remove
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ Rubus fruticosus Spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐
84
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ Prunus, Eucalyptus Can leave if not reproducing
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Pruning Negative Only prune if plantings interfering with safety along walkway
1 Planting Positive Increase plantings and plant denser
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant the area to link the two parts of the SNA to each other and to Dobel 1. Plant at higher densities to increase
canopy cover and reduce weeds. Remove ecological weeds like Rubus fruticosus.
Notes
85
Otatara Park
Site number: 29
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1929723.125E, 5615939N Date: 2.3.19
Area m²: 6099.2 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) √ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal x Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
9
Kereru 11/12
Path and vegetation
Site Map
86
Site Description
Planted small park with exotic and cultivars at the top. Centre and lower section well-established natives has been underplanted. Garden-like perimeter with Acacia regeneration. Bare ground with leaf litter. Dodonaea viscosa regeneration. Coprosma regeneration too.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Contains broadleaved forest species
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Species diverse, Vitex lucens, Agathis australis and
Metrosideros excelsa out
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2
Planted in 1993. Less than 10% left of forest vegetation in Napier City boundary
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 A 2 1 Mixed broadleaved forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Entelea arborescens, Coprosma repens, Austroderia spp, Corokia x cheesemanii, Dodonaea viscosa, Pittosporum ralphii, Arthropodium cirratum, Corokia cotoneaster, Pseudopanax discolor, Coprosma robusta, Pseudopanax laetus, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Phormium cookianum, Pittosporum eugenioides, Sophora tetraptera, Cordyline australis, Griselinia littoralis, Metrosideros excelsa, Cyathea dealbata, Plagianthus regius, Podocarpus totara, Melicope ternata, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Alectryon excelsus, Hoheria populnea, Solanum laciniatum, Pteris tremula, Myrsine australis, Asplenium bulbiferum, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Pseudopanax arboreus, Pseudopanax crassifolius, Vitex lucens, Sophora microphylla, Dacrydium cupressinum, Kunzea robusta, Pseudopanax hybrid, Agathis australis, Clianthus maximus, Rhopalostylis sapida, Coprosma cultivars, Veronica spp. cultivar, Phormium cultivar. Agapanthus praecox, Acacia spp, Solanum nigrum, Prunus spp, Carex leporina, Liriodendron tulipifera, Trachycarpus fortunei, Salix cinerea
87
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. √
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. √
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Kereru, fantail, bellbird
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
Solanum nigrum
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Prunus and Acacia regen
Drill and poison over time
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
88
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage.
√
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Pruning Negative Only prune if vegetation is a hazard
1 Spraying Positive/Negative Removes weeds but can reduce natural regerenation as well
1 Mowing Negative Reduce so natural regerenation can happen
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Increase canopy by planting in gaps and planting around the margins. Remove regenerating exotic trees. Make sure this is done slowly so it won’t create large canopy gaps.
Notes
89
Otatara Pa 1 Site number: 30
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1929179.875E, 5615410N Date: 2.3.19
Area m²: 11213.2 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public ☐ Private √ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII) M Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced √ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland √ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
2-4
Overview
Site Map
90
Site Description
Kunzea robusta dominated vegetation with some sparse areas. Trees felled on hillside. Pasture grass is the ground cover. Canopy height of 4m in the gully and ridges. Dry and well drained land.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Kunzea dominant early succession forest.
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a e
stimate
% Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 6 1 100 Kunzea robusta forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Kunzea robusta, Coprosma robusta, Myoporum laetum
Rubus fruticosus, Pasture grass, Lupinus spp, Foeniculum vulgare
91
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. √
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. √
Fauna Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Swallow
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Lupinus Foeniculum vulgare
Will get shaded out by a closed native canopy
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
Rubus fruticosus Spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
92
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Tree felling - species unknown
1 Planted Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Plant to reduce margins and join to other Otarata Pa SNA sites.
Notes
93
Otatara Pa 2
Site number: 31
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1928991E, 5615228.5N Date: 2.3.19
Area m²: 4543.36 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public ☐ Private √ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII) M Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced √ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland √ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
2
Dieback and grass cover
4/5
Overview
Site Map
94
Site Description
10m tall Myoporum laetum canopy. Bare understorey, only pasture grass and Rubus fruticosus groundcover. Some dieback of Myoporum laetum. Many of the trees have galls on the bark.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 2 1 100 Myoporum laetum forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Myoporum laetum, Coprosma robusta, Pteris tremula, Phormium cultivar
Rubus fruticosus, Pasture grass
95
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. √
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
Rubus fruticosus Spray
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
Rubus fruticosus Spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Pest animals If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. ☐
96
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Planted Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant to fill canopy gaps and connect to other SNA sites.
Notes
97
Otatara Pa 3
Site number: 32
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1929088.875E, 5615074.5N Date: 2.3.19
Area m²: 28093.06 Landform: Hill
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public ☐ Private √ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII) M Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing √ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland √ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
7/8
Overview
Site Map
98
Site Description
Dominated by Myoporum laetum and Chamaecytisus proliferus. 8m high canopy height. Lot of weeds in the groundcover as well as pasture grass. Some rubbish dumping.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2
Kunzea robusta
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the hills in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 a 2 1 50 Myoporum laetum - mixed broadleaved forest
2 1 a 2 1 50 Sophora tetraptera-Chamaecytisus proliferus-Coprosma robusta forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Myoporum laetum, Sophora tetraptera, Phormium cookianum, Cordyline australis, Phormium tenax, Pittosporum ralphii, Kunzea robusta, Alectryon excelsus, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Coprosma robusta, Dodonaea viscosa, Veronica stricta, Pteris tremula, Blechnum novae-zelandiae, Coriaria arborea, Pittosporum eugenioides, Sophora tetraptera
Foeniculum vulgare, Rubus fruticosus, pasture grass, Chamaecytisus proliferus, Eriobotrya japonica, Malus x domestica, Piptatherum miliaceum, Paspalum dilatatum, Calystegia sylvatica, Solanum nigrum, Crataegus monogyna Ligustrum lucidum
99
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1 Unit 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. √ ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback.
☐ √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. √ √
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species.
☐ ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐ ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐ ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐ ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
√ √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Greywarbler, chaffinch, blackbird, tūī
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐
Foeniculum vulgare Rubus fruticosus
Spray Rubus
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. √ √
3 Occasional, up to 10%
ground area. ☐ ☐
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ ☐
Rubus fruticosus Calystegia silvatica
Spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. √ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
canopy cover. ☐ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
Chamaecytisus proliferus Eriobotrya japonica Ligustrum
lucidum Drill and poison trees
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover.
√ √
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
4 None present. ☐ ☐
100
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
All Rubbish Negative Deter people from dumping
All Pest control Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fully fence site. Remove rubbish and deter people from dumping as it is a hazard. Plant under exotic canopy and kill the exotics as the natives come up to take over the canopy. Plant area to connect to other SNA sites.
Notes
Classed in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
101
Saline plain
Ahuriri Estaury: Site number 14 is a combination of site sheets: Upper Ahuriri Estaury (14-1), Mid-Ahuriri Estaury
(14-2), Taipo Stream (14-3), Westshore Reserve ponds (14-4), Westshore Reserve wetland (14-5) and Lower
Ahuriri Estaury (14-6). All site sheets given below.
Ahuriri Estaury (Upper Ahuriri) Site number: 14 -1
Recorder: MC, RJ, TC, CK Grid Ref/GPS: 1930305.125E, 5627119.5N Date: 27.3.19
Area m² (excluding water): 563511.6 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased x Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII) M Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? √ Year fenced (if known):
102
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture √ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. Block GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1 a
Drainage pipes
4-9 a
Overview
1-4 b Aerial of site
15/16/18/28 b Juncus and Salicornia quinqueflora wetland
35 b Juncus and pasture grass margin
32/33 B Cat trap
1-10 c Aerial distance
Site Map
103
Site Description
A: Wetland species are Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis 1m tall and Salicornia quinqueflora. Stockbank margin is
pasture grass dominated. Abundant swallows and ducks. Ephemeral sections. Drainage pipes are in the site.
B: Large open estuarine wetland with 50cm-1m Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis. Margins mixed with pasture
grasses on opposite side. Salicornia quinqueflora abundant throughout actual wetland. Ahuriri River estuary flows
through middle. High fish abundance, high avian abundance. No trees at margins – too salty. Relictual Sophora and
Corynocarpus laevigatus at far perimeter. Drainage channels in wetland. Sedimentation problem at top end and
chemical pollution at city end. Intensive predator control to remove cats. New fencing present. Tube worm is
problem in the river. Pre-earthquake the area was a freshwater system to the edge of the lagoon then uplift has
caused it to become a saltwater influenced wetland. Channelling was put in during the 1930’s. This has been
bulldozed and destroyed.
C: Large open wetland / river. Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis 50cm-1m tall. Stopbank on opposite bank fenced.
High fish abundance. Too salty for trees at edges. Salicornia quinqueflora / Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis /
green sedge-grass / pasture grass. Tube worm present, wetland birdlife in high numbers.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 1 Typical saline wetland
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals 2 Wetland birds present
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences 2 Salicornia quinqueflora to Juncus/S. quinqueflora dominant
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1 Reduced in Napier by drainage and farming
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2 Wetland
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site 1 Largest site within the city boundary
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 1
Connected to other wetlands and the Ahuriri Estuary by the river
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
104
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 5 B 20 23 24 25 29 1 70 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis/ Salicornia quinqueflora wetland
2 1 B 20 25 29 1 30 Pasture grass Lolium arundinaceum/ Salicornia quinqueflora wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Triglochin striata, Salicornia quinqueflora, Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Plagianthus divaricatus, Cotula
coronopifolia, Aster subulatus, Polypogon monspeliensis, Ficinia nodosa, Deschampsia spp, Typha orientalis
Lolium arundinaceum, thistle, Rubus fruticosus, Atriplex prostrata, Plantago major, Plantago coronopus, Chloris
truncata, Ulex europaeus, Hypochaeris glauca, Lycium ferocissimum, Veronica anagallis-aquatica
Wetland/Estuary Unit:1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐
Bog ☐ Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water
level changes?
Yes
√ No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water
turbidity
Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent √
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 60 Herbs 40 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin
vegetation
Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 60 FACW 30 FAC 5 FACU 5 UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover % 10 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous x
Invasive species in margin: cover % 20 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
105
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows √ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland Wetland margin
Comments
Stock get in. Stopbanks. Grazed round. Sediment deposit
No disturbance
Wetland/Estuary Unit:2
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m ☐ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐
Bog ☐ Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes ☐ No √ Evidence of water
level changes?
Yes
√ No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water
turbidity
Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent ☐
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin
vegetation
Sedge/grass 70 Herbs 30 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL may be
higher
20 FACW 20 FAC 50 FACU 10 UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover % 10 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover % 20 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous x
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows √ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland Wetland margin
Comments
Stock get in. Stopbanks. Grazed round.
No disturbance
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Grey heron, black swan, swallow, shag, duck, Bittern, fernbird (historic), geese, magpie, spur-winged plover,
greywarbler, royal spoonbill, harrier, paradise shelduck, pied stilt
106
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes for dominant
Species etc
Comments & suggested
management
Ground cover
weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground
area. ☐ ☐ Atriplex prostrata,
Rubus fruticosus
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area.
√ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐ Rubus fruticosus Spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. ☐ √
4 None present. √ ☐
Shrub/Tree
Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey
or canopy cover. ☐ ☐ Lycium ferocissimum Cut and poison
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey
or canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover.
√ ☐
4 None present. ☐ √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐ √ Stock, tubeworm
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ ☐
107
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Stock grazing Negative
Pest management Positive Maintain
Some blocks fully fenced Positive
Drainage pipes Negative
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove environmental weeds like Rubus fruticosus. Eliminate stock from the area with more fencing. Increase
connectivity of the units by planting the edges to better join the blocks and connect to other sites along the river.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data:
hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report.
108
Ahuriri Estaury (Mid-Ahuriri Estaury) Site number: 14 - 2
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1929869E, 5623658N Date: 2.3.13
Area m² (excluding water): 446543 (includes 84223.66 outside city limit)
Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
X Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
X No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1-6
Aerial overview
109
Site Map
Site Description
Salicornia quinqueflora and Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis dominate species on the western shore side. Large
embayments along the western side which generally have both spp. Farm animals known to roam to waters edge.
Salicornia becomes uncommon on eastern shore side. Triglochin and Thyridia repens grow in areas where tall
fescue has not taken over. Discontinuous juncus margin 1- 3 m wide.
Quarantine rd to top pumping station: Wide fringe of raupo especially on eastern shore side. Patchy juncus.
Between juncus and raupo tall bolboschoenus spp grows.
Barry Riddler (pers. comm.) – runoff is from new housing development. Bittern and kotare used to be present.
Crabs are now gone. White heron not seen in two years. Effluent and runoff from new subdivisions has caused loss
of kotare, bittern, crabs and pristine nature of wetland. No whitebait present. Swimming now unsafe in the stream.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2) Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does
not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 1 Typical saline wetland
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals 2 Various bird species
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences 2 Salicornia quinqueflora to juncus/pasture grass
110
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Tyridia repens
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1 Less than 10% left in the Napier City boundary
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2 Estuary/wetland
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site 2 Large continuous SNA site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Link to estuary and other sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 2 3 5 B 20 24 22 25 1 100 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis /Salicornia quinqueflora pasture grass
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Salicornia quinqueflora, Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Bolboschoenus spp, Triglochin striata, Thyridia repens,
Typha orientalis. Pasture grass, Lolium arundinaceum
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √
Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐ Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow ☐ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline √ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
111
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality
Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent √
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 20 Herbs 80 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation
Sedge/grass 80 Herbs 20 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 70 FACW 20 FAC 10 FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover % 20
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous √
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows √ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland Wetland margin
Comments effluent / run off stopbank and stock No disturbance
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
White-faced heron, harrier, black swan, tūī, sparrow, spoonbill, kereru, bellbird
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐ Pasture grasses, Lolium
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
112
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. √
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. ☐
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Walking tracks Positive
1 Effluent/run off Loss of bird and crustacean spp. Unsafe swimming Upgrade effluent and stormwater system or divert.
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Management of subdivision runoff is needed to reduce pollution that is harming wildlife. Fully fence the area. Plant
natives to reduce the area of exposed boundary.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data:
hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report.
113
Ahuriri Estaury (Taipo Stream)
Site number: 14 - 3
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1930791.375E, 5621145.5N Date: 2.3.13
Area m²(excluding water): 16365.3 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
x No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
Site Map
114
Site Description
Extensive flats of Salicornia at the mouth and western side. To the south, Juncus becomes dominant.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 1 Typical saline wetland
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1 Less than 10% of vegetation left in the Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2 Part of Ahuriri Estuary
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other estuary SNA sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
% Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 2 3 5 B 20 24 22 25 1 100 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis /Salicornia quinqueflora pasture grass
wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Salicornia quinqueflora, Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis
pasture grasses
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow ☐ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline √ Other (describe)
115
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent √
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 50 Herbs 50 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass 80 Herbs 20 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 70 FACW 20 FAC 10 FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows √ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
No disturbance
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant
Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
Pasture grasses
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
116
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fully fence. Plant along stream to connect to other SNA sites.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report.
117
Ahuriri Estaury (Westshore Reserve Ponds) Site number: 14 - 4
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1933261.75E, 5623290N Date: 4.3.19
Area m² (excluding water): 136429.6 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
√ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? Yes/No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes √ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
118
Site Map
Site Description
C: Large amounts of both Myoporum spp and Phormium tenax planted at shores. Ficinia nodosa increasing in drier
areas. Shores mostly Salicornia or Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis. Central eastern side tall vegetation is lacking
and the damp compacted gravel ground has a turf of Selliera radicans, Spergularia tasmanica, Plantago coronopus,
Isolepis cernua, Puccinellia fasciculata.
Western side of the pond is mown grassland with eucalypts. Between this and juncus is another turf zone.
Salt-pan to westshore pond: Thyridia repens, Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Cotula coronopifolia in the water.
dry ground has Puccinellia fasciculata cover. Samolus repens grows here too.
B: surrounded by broad fringe of Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, some planted flax. Ruppia polycarpa washes up
among juncus. Continuation of the pond of damp land as juncus in lower half and saline herbfield of Salicornia
species, Plantago coronopus, Spergularia tasmanica and Puccinellia which goes into turf of Selliera radicans.
Triglochin striata dominates in small wet peaty depressions.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
2 Typical saline vegetation
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
119
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
2 Juncus/Salicornia, saltmarsh turf, pasture grass and shrubs
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
2 Thyridia repens
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area
1 Less than 10% vegetation remaining in the city
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
2 Estuarine
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
2 Seventh largest SNA surveyed
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
2 Close to other estuary sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate
% Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 2 B 29 1 70 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis/Salicornia quinqueflora wetland
2 2 B 20 1 10 Isolepis cernua- Puccinellia fasciculata /Selliera radicans-Spergularia
tasmanica- Plantago coronopus wetland
3 2 B 20 29 1 20 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis/Thyridia repens-Cotula coronopifolia
wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Phormium tenax, Myoporum laetum, Triglochin striata, Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Thyridia repens, Samolus
repens, Ficinia nodosa, Cotula coronopifolia, Salicornia quinqueflora, Selliera radicans, Spergularia tasmanica,
Isolepis cernua, Ruppia polycarpa
Myoporum insulare, Plantago coronopus, Puccinellia fusciculata, Pasture grass
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
120
Grass/sedge meadow ☐ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline √ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear √ Water Quality
Algal blooms ☐ Pollution ☐
Translucent ☐
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 50 Herbs 50 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation
Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 50 FACW 50 FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments City pollution. No disturbance
Wetland/Estuary Unit:2
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp ☐ Marsh √
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow ☐ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline √ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear √ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution ☐
Translucent ☐
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 20 Herbs 80 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 80 FACW 10 FAC 10 FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover % 25
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous √
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 3
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh √
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow ☐ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline 3 Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
121
Degree of water turbidity Clear √ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution ☐
Translucent ☐
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 20 Herbs 70 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 80 FACW 20 FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐ ☐ ☐
Puccinellia fasciculata, plantago coronopus
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐ √ ☐
4 None present. √ ☐ √
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐ ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √ √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover. ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or canopy cover. ☐ ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √ √
122
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area. ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered.
Occasional stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge.
☐ ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐ ☐
4 No damage.
√ √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant to connect to other SNA sites.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data:
hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report.
123
Ahuriri Estaury (Westshore Reserve Wetland)
Site number: 14 - 5
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1933554E, 5622784N Date: 1.3.19
Area m² (excluding water): 31611.3 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) √ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
x No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
√ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply) Between major roads
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
2/3
Overview of margin and wetland
Site Map
124
Site Description
Open roadside wetland sea rush and grass sections. Detention dam nearby. Thyridia repens abundant in saltmarsh zone.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 1 Saline wetland
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences 2 Juncus to herbaceous salt marsh
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 2 Thyridia repens
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1
Less than 10% vegetation left in the city
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2 Wetland
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Close to other estuary sites
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
% Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 2 5 B 24 1 90 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis wetland
2 2 5 B 23 20 1 10 Bolboschoenus /Samolus- Thyridia wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Samolus repens, Selliera radicans, Plagianthus divaricatus, Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Scirpus spp, Triglochin striata, Ficinia nodosa, Bolboschoenus spp, Apodasmia similis, Cotula coronopifolia, Thyridia repens
Atriplex prostrata, Asparagus asparagoides, Trifolium fragiferum
125
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent √
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 100 Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 100 FACW
FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover % 0 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river ☐ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments Roadside pollution? No disturbance
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 2
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m ☐ Swamp ☐ Marsh √
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes ☐ No √ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution ☐
Translucent ☐
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass 60 Herbs 40 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 40 FACW 30 FAC 30 FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover % 5 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch x continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river ☐ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments No disturbance
126
Fauna Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐
Atriplex prostrata
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐ √
4 None present. √ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐ ☐
Asparagus asparagoides
Spot spraying
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐ √
4 None present. √ ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey
or canopy cover. ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered.
Occasional stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge.
☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response Gravel substrate in margin areas
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration
within a site.
Increase vegetation to increase connectivity with other SNA’s. Remove environmental weeds like Asparagus asparagoides.
Notes
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report.
127
Ahuriri Estuary (Lower Ahuriri Estuary)
Site number: 14 - 6
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1933550E, 5622315N Date: 4.3.19
Area m² (excluding water): 357533.6 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) √ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII) M Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures: Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? Yes/No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply) √ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude /Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
13/14/18/19/20
Overview
15/16/17
Salicornia quinqueflora and margins
Site Map
128
Site Description
Very large estuarine system. Salicornia quinqueflora dominant vegetation, on shingle. Large open areas of water in the centre. Pasture grass margins with some shrubs/trees.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1 Historic vegetation type is saline wetland
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
1 Coastal/wetland birds
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
1 Salicornia quinqueflora to pasture grass to shrubs/trees
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 1
Thyridia repens
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1 Less than 10% left in Napier city. Large regional wetland
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 1
Large estuary
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment. 3F – An originally rare ecosystem type 3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site 1 Large estuary
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 1
Links to many sites along the Ahuriri River
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species 1 Coastal/wetland birds
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 2 B 1 2 1 100 Salicornia quinqueflora - Pasture grass wetland
129
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.) Apium prostratum, Thyridia repens, Triglochin striatum, Samolus repens, Selliera radicans, Spergularia tasmanica, Bolboschoenus medianus, Isolepis cernua, Ficinia nodosa, Schoenoplectus pungens, Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Salicornia quinqueflora Helminthotheca echioides, Juncus bufonius, Juncus articulatus, Carex divulsa, Sporobolus africanus, Puccinellia fasciculata, Poa compressa, Cenchrus longisetus, Lagurus ovatus, Hordeum murinum, Cynodon dactylon, Critesion hystrix, Bromus hordeaceus, Sherardia arvensis, Bromus diandrus, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Asphodelus fistulosus, Sedum acre, Spergularia arvensis, Pennisetum clandestinum, Rumex obtusifolius, Cotoneaster glaucophyllus, Lycium ferocissimum, Rosa spp, Calystegia soldanella, Rubus fruticosus, Carduus tenuiflorus, Centaurea calcitrapa, Schedonorus phoenix, Solanum diflorum, physalifolium , Solanum pseudocapsicum, Trifolium dubium, Trifolium repens, Trifolium tomentosum, Verbascum thapsus, Vicia sativa, Aster subulatus, Gazania rigens, Hypochoeris radicata, Hypochoeris glauca, Sonchus oleraceus, Lysimachia arvensis, Datura stramonium, Echium vulgare, Erodium cicutarium, Glaucous form, Geranium pusillum, Lepidium africanum, Linum bienne, Linum catharticum, Atriplex prostrata, Lotus angustissimus, Lotus suaveolens, Malva parviflora, Medicago nigra, Melilotus albus, Melilotus indicus, Modiola caroliniana, Orobanche minor, Papaver rhoeas, Plantago coronopus, Plantago lanceolata, Plantago major
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake √ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp ☐ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent √
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 10 Herbs 90 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass 100 Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 90 FACW 10 FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High ☐Medium √ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments City pollution. No disturbance
Fauna Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Welcome swallow, Red-billed gull, Black-billed gull, Black swan, Black-backed gull
130
Threats Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
Rubus fruticosus, Atriplex prostrata
Spray Rubus
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover. ☐
Cotoneaster Cut and poison
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area. ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. √ Tubeworm
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage.
☐
Human Associated Activities (Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Pollution Negative Reduce runoff into river
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fence to remove stock from all areas. Remove ecological weeds. Plant surrounding area to connect blocks outside of river together and with other SNA sites.
Notes Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live). Fauna and aquatic habitat in Bioresearchers (2004) report.
131
Bayview Wetland
Site number: 15
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1932883E, 5627104N Date: 3.3.10
Area m²(excluding water): 225412 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply) √ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII) M Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected: If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing √ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland √ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1/2/3
Juncus wetland
9-14
Overview of wetland/waterbody 17/18/21
Lemna/Azolla
22/23
Thyridia repens
Site Map
132
Site Description
50cm to 1m tall dominant Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis with Salicornia quinqueflora interspersed throughout in the wetland. Saltmarsh margins contain at risk – naturally uncommon Thyridia repens. Bike track nearby. Water in the system with wetland birds, a lot of Canada geese. Drainage ditches nearby. Signs of stock with sheep roaming throughout surrounding area.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 1
Typical saline wetland
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
2 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis-Salicornia quinqueflora wetland to Cotula-Samolus-Thyridia margin. Juncus and pasture grass wetland to Selliera radicans margin
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 1 Thyridia repens
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 1 Wetlands reduced across the Hawkes Bay region
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site 2 Fifth largest SNA surveyed
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor 2 Link to other wetlands and estuary
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 2 5 B 24 20 1 70 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis /Salicornia quinqueflora wetland
2 2 5 B 20 1 10 Symphyotrichum subulatum /Cotula coronopifolia -Samolus repens - Thyridia repens wetland
3 2 5 B 24 25 1 10 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis-pasture grasses wetland
4 2 5 B 20 1 10 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis /Selliera radicans- Spergularia tasmanica wetland
133
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Cotula coronopifolia, Salicornia quinqueflora, Symphyotrichum subulatum, Thyridia repens, Samolus repens, Lemna spp, Selliera radicans, Triglochin striata, Spergularia tasmanica, Azolla spp
Atriplex prostrata, Paspalum distichum, Lolium arundinaceum, Trifolium fragiferum, Foeniculum vulgare, thistle, pasture grasses
Wetland/Estuary Unit:1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow ☐ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent √
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 80 Herbs 20 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 20 FACW 80 FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover % 5 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch x continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Stock have been in
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 2
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow ☐ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent ☐
Opaque √
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs 100 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 80 FACW 20 FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover % 5 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch x continuous
134
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments stock have been in No disturbance
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 3
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent √
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 100 Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL
FACW 70 FAC 30 FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover % 5 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch x continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland Wetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Signs of stock presence
Wetland/Estuary Unit: 4
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m ☐ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes ☐ No √ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution √
Translucent ☐
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass
Herbs
Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass 10 Herbs 90 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 50 FACW 50 FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High ☐ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover % 5 Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch x continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments stock have been in No disturbance
135
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Canada goose, swallows, goldfinch, sparrow
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Unit 4
Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Atriplex prostrata
Removal
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. √ √ √ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √ √ √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √ √ √
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Unit 4
Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
√ √ √ √ Stock around wetland
perimeter and fresh signs with the wetland
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only
near edges. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
4 No damage. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Stock Negative Fully fence area
Pest management Positive Continue management
Bike track
Notes
136
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fence the wetland from stock. Reduce the area exposed to the margins by planting native vegetation in areas with large marginal edge.
Notes
Another name for wetland area is Keteketerau wetland
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data: hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
137
Ahuriri Plain Wetland Site number: 16
Recorder: Grid Ref/GPS: 1932330E, 5625732N Date: 4.3.19
Area m² (no water): 882725 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII) x Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing √ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? Yes/No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
√ Dairying, cropping or horticulture √ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
Site Map
138
Site Description
Large open wetland north of Hawke’s Bay airport. Dominated by Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis and Salicornia
quinqueflora and pasture grass at margins. Monoculture vegetation like other estuarine SNAs.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating
(1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does
not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1 Typical saline wetland
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
2 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis - Salicorniaa quinqueflora
wetland to pasture grass margins
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area
1 Wetlands reduced across the Hawkes Bay region
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
2
Estuarine wetland
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special
ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
2 Second largest SNA in Napier city
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
2 Link to other wetlands and estuary
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 2 B 20 24 25 1 100 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis- pasture grass/ Salicornia quinqueflora
wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Salicornia quinqueflora
Pasture grasses
139
Vegetation condition
Wetland/Estuary Unit:1
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m √ Swamp √ Marsh
☐
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes √ No ☐ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes √
No ☐ Unsure ☐
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution ☐
Translucent ☐
Opaque √
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 70 Herbs 30 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass 90 Herbs 10 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 80 FACW 20 FAC 25 FACU 20 UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river √ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland Wetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
Pasture grasses
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area.
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds 1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
140
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes
Species etc.
Comments suggested
management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints)
Stock heard or seen throughout area.
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. stock Around perimeter
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges.
4 No damage.
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Cycling tracks Neutral
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fence the wetland from stock. Reduce the area exposed to the margins by planting native vegetation in
areas with large marginal edge.
Notes
Another name for wetland area is Keteketerau wetland
Ranked in Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ecosystem top 30% prioritization layer (Source Data:
hbrc_sde_edit.SDEADMIN.HawkesBay_TerrestrialSites_Top30Percent_Live).
141
Embankment Road Wetland Site number: 21
Recorder: RJ Grid Ref/GPS: Date: 4.1.19
Area m2 (no water): 20857.6 Landform: Saline plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
x No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced
Was entire fence seen? Yes/No Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions, industrial ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
Site Map
142
Site Description
Small salt marsh/meadow surrounded by industrial urban Napier. Appears to be dominated by Salicornia
quinqueflora.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
(Source from report of Draft NPSIB 72-76)
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
2 Typical saline plain vegetation
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area
2
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
2 Estuarine
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
2 Down stream (drain) from Ahuriri Estuary
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 2 B 20 1 100 Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis/ Salicornia quinqueflora – Pasture grass wetland
143
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date
of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy
species, understorey species etc.)
Juncus krausii subsp. australiensis, Salicornia quinqueflora
Pasture grass
Vegetation condition
Wetland/Estuary Unit:
Description (tick appropriate category)
Lake ☐ Shallow water <2m ☐ Swamp ☐ Marsh √
Fen
☐ Bog ☐
Shrub-carr ☐
Grass/sedge meadow √ Deciduous margin ☐ Saline ☐ Other (describe)
Water in the system? Yes ☐ No √ Evidence of water level changes?
Yes
☐ No ☐ Unsure √
Degree of water turbidity Clear ☐ Water Quality Algal blooms ☐ Pollution ☐
Translucent ☐
Opaque ☐
Plant Communities (enter % cover)
Wetland vegetation Sedge/grass 10 Herbs 90 Shrubs
Trees
Wetland margin vegetation Sedge/grass 90 Herbs 10 Shrubs
Trees
Pasture
Wetland Hydrophyte % OBL 50 FACW 50 FAC
FACU
UPL
Plant vigour in wetland Wetland Wetland margin
High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐ High √ Medium ☐ Low ☐
Invasive species in wetland: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Invasive species in margin: cover %
Distribution (circle) single patch >1 patch continuous
Source of water: spring ☐ surface flows ☐ stream/river ☐ precipitation only ☐
Erosion/Disturbance Wetland WeWetland margin
Comments No disturbance
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
144
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating
Estimate
(Tick appropriate level) Unit 1 Notes for
dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area. ☐
Pasture grasses
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area.
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional stock
heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. Stock
4 No damage.
☐
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation
clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Notes
Management recommendations
Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species
protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Fence. Try to plant along drains to connect to estuary.
Notes
145
Plains
Westshore Reserve Bush
Site number: 18
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1933392.5E, 5622971N Date: 1.3.19
Area m²: 9393.26 Landform: Plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) post and 1 rail
√ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply) road / wetland lake
☐ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
3
Overview
Site Map
146
Site Description
Diverse, well established planted. 7-8m Myoporum laetum, Pittosporum species 6m. Lots of broom at edges. Smaller amounts of Foeniculum vulgare lot of Hedera helix. Good regeneration of natives in places, Sophora species and Coprosma species some Myrsine australis. Generally weedy.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 SPP diverse
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit 2 Pittosporum ralphii
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 Planted in 1999
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 2 1 100 Mixed broadleaved forest- Myoporum laetum /Pittosporum.
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Phormium tenax, Leptospermum scoparium, Phormium cookianum, Pittosporum ralphii, Pittosporum crassifolium, Pittosporum eugenioides, Dodonaea viscosa, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Alectryon excelsus, Myoporum laetum, Sophora tetraptera, Coprosma robusta, Kunzea robusta, Plagianthus regius, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Cordyline australis, Sophora microphylla, Carex geminata, Coprosma repens, Myrsine australis, Pseudopanax arboreus, Astelelia banksia, Lophomyrtus bullata cultivar
Acacia melonoxylon, Hedera helix, Chamaecytisus proliferus, Foeniculum vulgare, Cotoneaster glaucophyllus, Prunus spp, Solanum betaceum, Rubus fruticosus, Asparagus asparagoides, Piptatherum miliaceum, Carex leporina, Solanum nigrum, Lolium arundinaceum, Myoporum insulare, Genista monspessulana, Chloris truncata, Chrysanthemoides monilifera, Agapanthus praecox, Phytolacca octandra
147
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. √
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
√
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Sparrow, fantail, silvereye
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Phytolacca octandra Foeniculum vulgare Solanum nigrum
Will die when shaded out by a closed canopy
2 Common, 10%-50%
ground area. √
3 Occasional, up to
10% ground area. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐
Asparagus asparagoides Hedera helix Cut and poison
2 Common, 10%50%
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to
10% canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Genista monspessulana prunus Acacia melanoxylon cytus proliferus Cotoneaster
glaucophyllus Chrysanthemoides monilifera Myoporum insulare
Cut and poison shrubs. Slowly remove exotics from canopy by drilling and poisoning
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover.
☐
3 Occasional, up to
10% understorey or canopy cover.
√
4 None present. ☐
148
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Pest management Positive Continue
1 Planted Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Plant in canopy gaps and around margins to increase canopy cover and link blocks.
Notes
149
Harakeke Reserve
Site number: 22
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1935992.625E, 5618945.5N Date: 1.3.19
Area m²: 19422.3 Landform: Plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled regional x
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC) x Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) √ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
13
Entrance 3/9/12
Waterway vegetation/rubbish
8
Pathway 11
Muehlenbeckia overrun
Site Map
150
Site Description
Pittosporums and Coprosmas dominate. 6 to 8m tallest canopy. Drain waterway alongside with Typha orientalis. Concrete pavement through reserve. Big Acer spp specimen trees at path edge, could be a future problem. Pittosporum crassifolium regeneration Acer spp regeneration at streamside. Regeneration of palm.
2 rats seen.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Species diverse
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences 2 Ecotone from Typha orientalis to Bolboschoenus
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 <1% native vegetation is left on the plains
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e C
atego
ry C
od
e C
haracte
r H
abitat are
a Estim
ate %
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 A 2 1 70 Pittosporum spp. -mixed broadleaved forest
2 3 B 21 22 23 1 30 Typha orientalis/ Phormium tenax -Bolboschoenus wetland
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Phormium tenax, Sophora microphylla, Coprosma repens, Pittosporum eugenioides, Austroderia spp, Typha orientalis, Coprosma robusta, Alectryon excelsus, Muehlenbeckia complexa, Pittosporum crassifolium, Sophora tetraptera, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Pseudopanax hybrid, Cordyline australis, Olearia solandri, Corokia x cheesemanii, Dodonaea viscosa, Bolboschoenus spp, Olearia paniculata, Kunzea robusta, Plagianthus divaricatus, Podocarpus totara, Lemna, Veronica spp. cultivar, Coprosma hybrid, Olearia spp, Lophomyrtus obcordata
151
Lolium arundinaceum, Acacia melanoxylon, Araujia sericifera, Quercus spp, exotic sophora, Chloris truncata, pasture grass, Solanum nigrum, Acer spp, Prunus spp, thistle, Pinus spp, Hedera helix, Rubus fruticosus, Ipomoea indica, Echinochloa crus-galli
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1 Unit 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. √ ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback.
☐ √
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species.
√ ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐ ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐ √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. √ ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
☐ √
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Myna, thrush, sparrow, blackbird, fantail, ducks, rats
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐
Solanum nigrum thistle Will be shaded out by a closed canopy
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
ground area. √ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ ☐
Ipomoea indica, Rubus fruticosus,,Araujia
sericifera
Hand remove, spray, poison stumps
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
canopy cover. √ ☐
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
Regen of exotic specimens Slowly remove adults from area and hand remove seedlings
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
152
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover.
√ √
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
√ √ Seen rats
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage.
☐ ☐
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Rubbish dumping Negative Deter people from dumping
1 Planted Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Extend the width of the planting. Link to beach by planting in adjacent area. Remove ecological weeds.
Notes
153
SH50 planting Site number: 25
Recorder: MC, RJ, TC, CK Grid Ref/GPS: 1932045E, 5616926N Date: 27.2.19
Area m²: 4776.79 Landform: Plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal M Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1
Sophora regeneration 2/3
Weeds in reserve
Site Map
154
Site Description
Planted, very spp diverse and weedy. Mostly closed canopy some areas of canopy collapse. Sophora spp, Hoheria, Podocarpus totara and Dacrycarpus dacrydioides the main spp. Lot of Sophora microphylla natural regeneration. Broom relevant, likely planted Carmichaelia williamsii.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Sophora and Dacrycarpus dacrydioides broadleaved mix Metrosideros excelsa,
Agathis australis present but outside of natural distributional limit.
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Spp diverse
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 Under 1% of forest is left on the plains
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical R
egim
e
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
estim
ate
Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 A 4 1 100 mixed podocarp- broadleaved forest
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Hoheria sexstylosa, Piper excelsum, Alectryon excelsus, Coprosma repens, Pittosporum crassifolium, Pseudopanax hybrid, Sophora tetraptera, Myrsine australis, Podocarpus totara, Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Pittosporum eugenioides, Coprosma robusta, Melicope ternata, Melicytus ramiflorus, Myoporum laetum, Corynocarpus laevigatus, Prumnopitys ferruginea, Dicksonia squarrosa, Pittosporum tenuifolium, Carpodetus serratus, Astelia spp, Dacrydium cupressinum, Pseudopanax lessonii, Olearia solandri, Corokia x cheesemanii, Griselinia littoralis, Carmichaelia williamsii, Rubus schmidelioides, Muehlenbeckia complexa, Solanum laciniatum, Hoheria angustifolia, Agathis australis, Hedycarya arborea, Meryta sinclairii, Cyperus ustulatus
155
Pasture grass, Hedera helix, Solanum nigrum, Prunus spp, thistle, Conyza spp, Calystegia sylvatica, Vinca major, Helminthotheca echioides, Foeniculum vulgare, Araujia sericifera, Chamaecytisus proliferus, Piptatherum miliaceum, Banksia integrifolia
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. x
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. x
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. x
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Sparrow, fantail
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Hedera helix vinca and Araujia
Hand remove and spray
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. √
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground
area. ☐
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐
Hedera helix and Araujia Hand remove and spray
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy
cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ Prunus Chamaecytisus proliferus
For Cytisus cut and poison stumps. Remove Prunus if it is self-seeding
156
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Pruning Negative Only prune if vegetation posing a hazard
1 Planting Positive Continue
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Plant in canopy gaps and under canopy as some canopy species are nearing end of their life. Extend planting out both length and width ways to create a vegetation corridor, which could get closer to Friend’s Bush SNA.
Notes
157
Friend’s Bush Site number: 28
Recorder: TC, CK Grid Ref/GPS: 1932178.25E, 5616440.5N Date: 27.2.19
Area m²: 3736.01 Landform: Plain
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
☐ Public √ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
M No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures: fenced, planted
Fencing (tick one) ☐ No fencing ☐ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced √ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? √ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
1/2
Outside 3
Entrance and inside
4-12
Vegetation
Site Map
158
Site Description
Old planting, with paths throughout. Small water features. Ferns in understorey. Open area in middle with pond. Canopy height 12-15 m.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Metrosideros excelsa, Fuscospora fusca, Agathis australis outside
of distributional limits
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Planted with many natives
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2
One of few forest patches on the plain. Maybe only one in city. Planted in 1981
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
%
Vegetation description (Dominant species)
1 1 a 4 1 100 Mixed podocarp-broadleaved forest
159
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.)
Canopy: Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Podocarpus totara, Pittosporum eugenioides, Agathis australis, Metrosideros excelsa, Sophora tetraptera, Beilschmiedia tawa, Fuscospora fusca, Dacrydium cupressinum, Alectryon excelsus, Cordyline australis
Subcanopy: Piper excelsum, Pseudopanax hybrid, Cyathea medullaris, Melicytus ramiflorus, Rhopalostylis sapida, Prumnopitys ferruginea, Cyathea dealbata, Hoheria angustifolia
Ground: Asplenium bulbiferum, Arthropodium cirratum, Corokia Cotoneaster, Ptisana salicina, Astelia chatham, Libertia spp, Asteria solandri, Parsonsia heterophylla, Blechnum chambersii, Microsorum pustulatum
Exotics: Bromelia spp, Camellia japonica, Chlorophytum comosum, Ophiopogon japonicus, Pteris crepis, Nephrolepis cordifolia, Hedera helix
Regeneration: Dacrycarpus dacrydioides, Coprosma robusta, Melicytus ramiflorus, Pittosporum eugenioidies, Hoheria spp, Podocarpus totara, Corynocarpus laevigatus
Agapanthus praecox and roses on outside
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1
Forest/scrub
☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. ☐
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback. ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. √
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species. ☐
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. √
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. ☐
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
√
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder. ☐
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
Wood pigeon seen by locals, tūī, chaffinch, fantail, goldfish in pond, bees
160
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐
Agapanthus praecox, Hedera helix
Spray and hand remove
2 Common, 10%-50% ground area. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% ground area. √
4 None present. ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover. ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% canopy cover. ☐
4 None present. √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐
Camelia Drill and poison
2 Common, 10%-50% understorey or
canopy cover. ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10% understorey or
canopy cover. √
4 None present. ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered. Occasional
stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge. ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges.
☐
4 No damage. √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
1 Weeding Removal of natives and exotics Continue to remove exotics
1 Tracks maintained Continually cleared
1 Planting All planted Continue planting natives
Notes
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove environmental weeds. Try to reduce the distance between this and the SH50 highway SNA site by planting along the highway.
Notes
161
Coastal
Esplanade Herbfield
Site number: 17
Recorder: MC, RJ Grid Ref/GPS: 1933381.875E, 5624535N Date: 4.3.19
Area m²: 8037.44 Landform: Coastal margin
General information for the site:
Tenure (tick all that apply)
√ Public ☐ Private ☐ Māori ☐ Leased ☐ Mixed
Legal status and management (M = Managed, X = No management) management is fenced and/or pest controlled
No legal
Reserve (TA)
Covenant (QEII)
Reserve (DoC)
Agreement (RC)
If mix of legal status estimate % of legally protected:
If managed what are the measures:
Fencing (tick one)
☐ No fencing √ Some fencing ☐ Mostly fenced ☐ Fully fenced Was entire fence seen? ☐ Year fenced (if known):
Surrounding land use (tick all that apply)
√ Urban subdivisions ☐ Lifestyle blocks
☐ Garden; parkland ☐ Open space; Bare land; Recreation land
☐ Dairying, cropping or horticulture ☐ Sheep, beef or other agriculture
☐ Plantation forestry ☐ Permaculture tree lands; planted natives
☐ Coastal dunes ☐ Indigenous forest or scrub
Photos
Photo No. GPS Longitude / Easting GPS Latitude / Northing Description
4th march folder
27/54/last photo
Overview
Site Map
162
Site Description
Gravelfield beside coast, between properties. Herbfield with a lot of exotics. Lot of Cotoneaster glaucophyllus. Train track and biking path border site. Cotoneaster glaucophyllus regeneration. Very weedy/exotic. Only SNA in coastal environment.
Succulents and garden escapees from border properties.
Significance Justification criteria to Identify SNA
Significance criteria Rating (1,2)
Describe why the criteria is met at the site. Leave blank if does not meet criteria.
Criteria_1 – Representativeness
1A - Typical indigenous vegetation of the area 2 Contains species typical of coastal margins
1B –Habitat for typical suite of indigenous animals
Criteria_2 – Diversity and Pattern
2A – Indigenous species diversity 2 Only SNA to contain native gravel herbfield species
2B – Presence of ecotones, gradients or sequences
Criteria_3 – Rarity and Distinctiveness
3A – Habitat for threatened indigenous plant or animal 1 Coprosma acerosa
3B – Indigenous species at/near distributional limit
3C – Reduced to <30% of past extent of area 2 Only coastal herbfield site in Napier City
3D – Sand dunes, wetlands, or estuaries 2 Gravel back dune
3E – Biogenic habitats in the marine environment.
3F – An originally rare ecosystem type
3G – Distinctive assemblage/community or has special ecological/scientific feature
Criteria_4 – Ecological Context
4A – Large site
4B – Ecological buffer, linkage or corridor
4C – Critical habitat for an indigenous animal species
Habitat and Vegetation Description:
Un
it Nu
mb
er
Hyd
rolo
gical
Re
gime
Cate
gory
Co
de
Ch
aracter
Hab
itat area
Estimate
% Vegetation description
(Dominant species)
1 1 B 36 2 20 Chrysanthemoides monilifera /Agapanthus praecox Garden mix herbfield
2 1 B 36 2 80 Cotoneaster glaucophyllus/ Pasture grass/ Gazania linearis herbfield
Flora and Fauna:
Include reference of rare, threatened or distinctive plant species seen or known to be, or have been present at the site (provide source and date of information e.g. SSBI, PNAP, botanical society. Also provide general comments on forest /vegetation composition e.g. dominant canopy species, understorey species etc.) Coprosma repens, Pittosporum crassifolium, Phormium cookianum, Pimelea carnosa, Muehlenbeckia complexa,
Ficinia nodosa, Disphyma australe, Coprosma acerosa, Phormium tenax cultivar, Agave americana, Agapanthus
praecox, Lagarus ovatus, pasture grass, Verbascum thapsus, Sisyrinchium spp, Iris spp, Euphorbia spp, Chrysanthemoides monilifera, thistle, Lavendula spp, Banksia integrifolia, Chloris truncata, Cotoneaster glaucophyllus, Cultivars, Cytisus scoparius, Cotoneaster coriaceus, Artemisia arborescens, Alyssum spp, Agave spp, Cotyledon orbiculata, Geranium spp, Pyracantha angustifolia, Rosmarinus officinalis, Rosa spp, Amaryllis belladonna, Eschscholzia californica, Aloe arborescens, Gazania linearis, Yucca gloriosa
163
Vegetation condition
Rating information
(Tick appropriate level) for each unit. Unit 1 Unit 2
Forest/scrub
☐ ☐
Canopy condition
1 Very sparse foliage, many large holes, dieback>20%. ☐ ☐
2 Foliage sparse in some areas, canopy holes uncommon. Some dieback. √
3 Foliage mostly dense, only occasional sparse areas, canopy holes rare, very occasional dieback.
☐ ☐
4 Abundant dense foliage over whole canopy, no canopy holes or dieback. ☐ ☐
Mid Tier 1 No browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Understorey bare. ☐ ☐
2 Very few browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Scattered seedlings of less palatable species.
√
3 Moderate browse palatable species 45cm-1.35m. Other species relatively abundant. ☐ ☐
4 Abundant browse palatable species and other species present. ☐ ☐
Ground Cover 1 Bare soil, rock, >20% of forest floor. Ground vegetation (ferns, moss, seedlings etc <45cm tall) absent of uncommon. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
2 Scattered bare soil & rock. Ground vegetation<20%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor. √
3 Bare soil, rock absent or very uncommon. Ground vegetation 25%-50%. Leaf litter on remainder of forest floor.
☐ ☐
4 No bare soil or rock, or eroding soil. Ground vegetation, abundant, 50%-100%. Leaf letter on remainder.
☐ ☐
Coastline habitat Unit: 1 and 2
Description %
Sand binders
Grass/Sedges x Herbs x Shrubs
Trees
Type (tick all that apply)
Fore dune ☐ Second dune ☐ Rear dune √
Rocky shore ☐ Coastal cliff ☐ Wetland ☐
Substrate % Boulders/rocks 90 Mud/Silt 10 Soil
Sand
Native plant vigour in coastal habitat High ☐ Medium ☐ Low √
Erosion/Disturbance (comments)
Fauna
Record all fauna species (exotic and native) seen (including sign) or heard during the survey.
164
Threats
Pest plants
Indicator Rating Estimate (Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes for dominant Species etc
Comments & suggested management
Ground cover weeds
1 Very common, cover >50% ground area.
☐ ☐
Gazania linearis
2 Common, 10%-50% ground
area. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
ground area. √ ☐
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Vine weeds 1 Very common, >50% canopy cover.
☐ ☐
2 Common, 10%50% canopy
cover. ☐ ☐
3 Occasional, up to 10%
canopy cover. ☐ ☐
4 None present. √ √
Shrub/Tree Weeds
1 Very common, <50% understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
Cotoneaster glaucophyllus Chrysanthemoides monilifera,
Yucca Cut and poison
2 Common, 10%-50%
understorey or canopy cover.
√ √
3 Occasional, up to 10%
understorey or canopy cover.
☐ ☐
4 None present. ☐ ☐
Pest animals
If evidence of the same pest animal is present in different units, this needs to be indicated.
Indicator Rating Estimate
(Tick appropriate level)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Notes Species etc.
Comments suggested management
Stock 1 Abundant fresh signs (droppings, major tracks and hoof prints) Stock heard or seen throughout area.
☐ ☐
2 Common fresh sign but sometimes scattered.
Occasional stock heard or seen, confined to scattered areas on edge.
☐ ☐
3 Sign uncommon. Sign is often old. Only near edges. ☐ ☐
4 No damage. √ √
Human Associated Activities
(Rubbish (organic or inorganic) dumping, Stock grazing, Drainage, Earth works, Erosion, Top dressing, Fire, Vegetation clearing, Herbicide application, Harvest / vegetation clearing, Planting, Animal pest control, Domestic pets, Fencing)
Unit Activity Impact Suggested Response
Tree felled
Gardens bordering
Notes
165
Management recommendations Comment on activities such as pest control, fencing, weed control, time, planting buffers, threatened species protection and/or habitat restoration within a site.
Remove ecological weeds. Plant site with native herbfield species to create native dominance.
Notes
References
Leathwick JR, Hashiba K, Lynch B. 2017. Biodiversity rankings for the Hawkes Bay Region HBRC Report No.
RM 17-20. HBRC Publication No. 4954.
Bioresearchers. 2004. Ahuriri Estaury Environmental Evaluation EMI: 0422 HBRC Plan No: 3503 Hawkes Bay
Regional Council.