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.