Key Native Ecosystem Plan for Taupō
Swamp Complex
2016-2019
Contents
1. The Key Native Ecosystem programme
1
2. Taupō Swamp Complex Key Native Ecosystem
3
3. Landowners, management partners and stakeholders
3.1.
Landowners
3.2.
Management partners
3.3.
Treaty partners
3.4.
Other partners
4
4
4
5
5
4. Ecological values
4.1.
Ecological designations
4.2.
Ecological significance
4.3.
Ecological features
6
6
7
8
5. Threats to ecological values at the KNE site
5.1.
Key threats
10
10
6. Management objectives
13
7. Management activities
7.1.
Ecological weed control
7.2.
Pest animal control
7.3.
Monitoring
7.4.
Community engagement
13
13
15
15
15
8. Operational plan
16
9. Funding contributions
9.1.
Budget allocated by GWRC
9.2.
Budget allocated by Porirua City Council
9.3.
Budget allocated by QEII National Trust
9.4.
Budget allocated by Kiwirail
18
18
18
18
19
Appendix 1: Site maps
20
Appendix 2: Nationally threatened species list
24
Appendix 3: Regionally threatened plant species list
25
Appendix 4: Ecological weed species
26
References
28
Taupō Swamp Complex
1. The Key Native Ecosystem programme
The Wellington region’s native biodiversity has declined since people arrived and the
ecosystems that support it face ongoing threats and pressures. Regional councils have
responsibility for maintaining indigenous biodiversity, as well as protecting significant
vegetation and habitats of threatened species, under the Resource Management Act
1991 (RMA).
Greater Wellington Regional Council’s (GWRC) Biodiversity Strategy (2016)1 sets a
framework that guides how GWRC protects and manages biodiversity in the
Wellington region to work towards the vision below.
GWRC’s vision for biodiversity
Healthy ecosystems thrive in the Wellington region and provide habitat for native
biodiversity
The Strategy provides a common focus across the council’s departments and guides
activities relating to biodiversity under this overarching vision, which is underpinned by
four operating principles and three strategic goals. Goal One drives the delivery of the
Key Native Ecosystem (KNE) programme.
Goal One
Areas of high biodiversity value are protected or restored
The KNE programme is a non-regulatory voluntary programme that seeks to protect
some of the best examples of original (pre-human) ecosystem types in the Wellington
region by managing, reducing, or removing threats to their ecological values. Sites with
the highest biodiversity values have been identified and prioritised for management.
Sites are identified as of high biodiversity value for the purposes of the KNE
programme by applying the four ecological significance criteria described below.
Representativeness
Rarity/
distinctiveness
Diversity
Ecological context
The extent to which
ecosystems and
habitats represent
those that were
once typical in the
region but are no
longer common
place
Whether ecosystems
contain
Threatened/At-Risk
species, or species at
their geographic
limit, or whether
rare or uncommon
ecosystems are
present
The levels of natural
ecosystem diversity
present ie, two or
more original
ecosystem types
present
Whether the site
provides important
core habitat, has
high species
diversity, or includes
an ecosystem
identified as a
national priority for
protection
A site must be identified as ecologically significant using the above criteria and be
considered sustainable for management in order to be considered for inclusion in the
KNE programme. Sustainable for the purposes of the KNE programme is defined as: a
1
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
site where the key ecological processes remain intact or continue to influence the site
and resilience of the ecosystem is likely under some realistic level of management.
KNE sites can be located on private or publically owned land. However, land managed
by the Department of Conservation (DOC) is generally excluded from this programme.
KNE sites are managed in accordance with three-year KNE plans, such as this one,
prepared by the GWRC’s Biodiversity department in collaboration with the landowners
and other stakeholders. These plans outline the ecological values, threats, and
management objectives for sites and describe operational activities such as ecological
weed and pest animal control. KNE plans are reviewed regularly to ensure the
activities undertaken to protect and restore the KNE site are informed by experience
and improved knowledge about the site.
2
Taupō Swamp Complex
2. Taupō Swamp Complex Key Native Ecosystem
The Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site (52ha) is a complex of freshwater swamps that
would have once been one contiguous wetland. The KNE site is located in Plimmerton,
just north of Porirua City (see Appendix 1, Map 1 for location). The main body of the
KNE site; Taupō Swamp is confined between State Highway 1 (SH 1) and the North
Island Main Trunk railway line (NIMT). These two linear features separate the smaller
swamps from Taupō Swamp.
The KNE site is dominated by swamp flax (Phormium tenax) but contains a mosaic of
vegetation types including areas of sedgeland, tussockland, herbfield, scrubland and
open water. The KNE site is one of the largest remaining flax swamps in the Wellington
region and supports a variety of indigenous and threatened fish, bird and plant
species 2.
Prior to human settlement in the area, the lower valley floor was an inlet of the
Porirua harbour until sedimentation and uplift from earthquakes excluded salt water
and the wetlands transformed into a freshwater swamp fed by Taupō stream. As the
salinity and the depth of water has changed, swamp vegetation also changed to
freshwater tolerant species 3.
3
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
3. Landowners, management partners and stakeholders
GWRC works in collaboration with landowners, management partners and
stakeholders where appropriate to achieve shared objectives for the site. GWRC also
recognises that effective working relationships are critical for achieving the
management objectives for each KNE site. In preparing this plan GWRC has sought
input from landowners, management partners and relevant stakeholders, and will
continue to involve them as the plan is implemented.
3.1.
Landowners
The KNE site has six landowners. These are:
•
•
•
•
•
Queen Elizabeth II National Trust (QEII), who own the majority of Taupō Swamp
(~30ha) having bought the swamp in 1986.
Porirua City Council (PCC) owns the southern portion of Taupō Swamp that lies
within the Plimmerton Domain and a small wetland in The Track Reserve (also
known as Taupō Swamp West D) to the west of railway line. These reserves are
managed in accordance with PCC’s Reserve Management Plan 4. PCC also own
the Whenua Tapu Swamp that lies within lands managed by PCC as a cemetery.
Collectively PCC owned land within the KNE site totals ~13ha.
The Botha family own Taupō Swamp West B, a small wetland (~1ha) on the
western side of the NIMT.
New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA) owns a land parcel (~8ha) along the
eastern boundary of Taupō Swamp primarily comprising of regenerating scrub
and includes the Ara Harakeke pathway, although PCC administer this land.
New Zealand Railways Corporation own the land associated with the NIMT,
however, this land is currently managed by the railway operators, Kiwirail. The
KNE site includes small parcels of this land (~1ha) along the western boundary
of Taupō Swamp and Whenua Tapu Swamp.
Appendix 1, Map 2 shows the swamp locations and main property boundaries within
the KNE site.
3.2.
Management partners
Management partners are those that fund or have an active role in the
implementation of the KNE plan or the management of the site. The management
partners of this KNE plan are GWRC, PCC, QEII, and Kiwirail.
Within GWRC, the management partners are the Biodiversity and Biosecurity
departments. The Biodiversity department is the overarching lead department for
GWRC on the coordination of biodiversity management activities and advice within the
KNE site. The Biosecurity department coordinates and carries out pest control
activities.
QEII, PCC and Kiwirail all provide funding towards ecological weed control operations
and QEII have also funded additional specific surveys of native biodiversity.
4
Taupō Swamp Complex
3.3.
Treaty partners
Ngāti Toa Rangatira (Ngāti Toa) are considered a treaty partner at this KNE site as
Taupō Swamp and Taupō Stream are considered important wetland features by Ngāti
Toa and have been recognized as a significant site under the Proposed Natural
Resources Plan for the Wellington Region (PNRP) 5., Schedule B (see Table 1). In
addition, the immediate area was important for Ngāti Toa with the headland to the
south of Taupō Swamp being a significant pā (fortified settlement) site. Taupō Swamp
and stream itself was an important resource for the pā site primarily, for food
gathering (mahinga kai), fresh water supply (wai māori), traditional healing plants
(rongoā) and a source of flax for weaving material (puna raranga).
3.4.
Other partners
GWRC’s Flood Protection department are considered a partner as they are responsible
for maintaining the capacity of lower reaches of the Taupō Stream from Plimmerton
Domain to the estuary for flood protection services. This primarily requires ensuring a
clear channel by removing any blockages and vegetation choking the stream. This also
includes maintaining the stream banks as required within the stream channel. Some
revegetation planting within the KNE site has taken place under this management
within Plimmerton Domain.
5
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
4. Ecological values
This section describes the various ecological components and attributes that make the
KNE site important. These factors determine the site’s value at a regional scale and
how managing it contributes to the maintenance of regional biodiversity.
Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site was once a contiguous swamp network but now
comprises four swamps separated by either SH 1 or the NIMT. These swamps are
collectively known as the Taupō Swamp Complex but are also identified individually
within DOC’s ecosite database as:
•
•
•
•
Taupō Swamp
Taupō Swamp West B
Taupō Swamp West D
Whenua Tapu Swamp
See Appendix 1, Map 2 for swamp locations.
The following four other nearby swamps are considered significant wetlands but are
currently not included within the KNE site boundary. These are Taupō West Swamp;
Taupō Swamp East N; Taupō Swamp East S and Plimmerton Swamp East. The first
three are hydrologically connected to the KNE site, while Plimmerton Swamp East
drains into Taupō Stream below the site’s boundary. Should an opportunity arise in the
future, GWRC would seek to incorporate these other four swamps into the KNE site,
but this can only happen with the agreement of the relevant landowner.
4.1.
Ecological designations
Table 1, below, lists ecological designations at all or part of the Taupō Swamp Complex
KNE site.
Table 1: Designations at the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
Designation level
Type of designation
Regional
Parts of the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site are scheduled under GWRC’s
Proposed Natural Resources Plan (PNRP) as Ecosystems and Habitats with
Significant Indigenous Biodiversity Values:
•
•
Significant Natural Wetland: Taupō Swamp Complex (Schedule F3)
River with Significant Indigenous Ecosystems - habitat for threatened and
at risk species: Taupō Stream (Schedule F1)
River with Significant Indigenous Ecosystems - habitat for six or more migratory
fish species: Taupō Stream (Schedule F1)
District
PCC has identified parts of the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site as Significant
Vegetation Sites (SVS) in suburban areas or Sites of Significance (SES) in rural
6
areas in the Porirua City District Plan under the following criteria:
•
•
•
•
Taupō Swamp (SVS E1-A1 – Highest ecological and amenity values)
Taupō Swamp West B (SES3 - Highly ecologically significant, and rare or
scarce in Porirua City)
Taupō Swamp West D (SES3)
Whenua Tapu Swamp (SES5 - Moderate ecological significance, mainly
as a seed source)
PCC have designated parts of the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site under the
6
Taupō Swamp Complex
Designation level
Type of designation
Reserves Act 1977 with the following reserve status:
•
Plimmerton Domain - Recreation Reserve, Local Purpose Reserve
(Landscape and Environmental Protection)
The Track Reserve (Taupō Swamp West D) - Local Purpose Reserve (Landscape
and Environmental Protection)
Other
Part of Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site is covenanted via a QEII Open Space
Covenant (P22)
Parts of the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site is scheduled under GWRC’s pNRP as:
•
Ngā Taonga Nui a Kiwa: Taupō Swamp and Taupō Stream (Schedule B)
Part of Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site within land acquired under the Public
Works Act and designated for cemetery purposes:
Whenua Tapu Swamp
4.2.
Ecological significance
The Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site is considered to be of regional significance
because:
•
•
•
•
It contains a highly representative ecosystem that was once typical or commonplace in
the region but is no longer commonplace
It contains ecological features that are rare or distinctive in the region, including
threatened birds, freshwater fish and vegetation communities
It contains high levels of ecosystem diversity, with several historic ecosystem types
represented within the KNE site boundary and includes several distinct vegetation
communities within the ecosystem
Its ecological context is valuable at the landscape scale as it is an ecosystem noted as a
national priority for conservation and, provides core/seasonal habitat for indigenous
wetland birds and freshwater fish species.
Representativeness
The Threatened Environment Classification system 7 indicates that the swamp
ecosystems found in the KNE site are considered Acutely Threatened with less than
10% indigenous cover remaining and that the habitat is under-protected on a national
scale. Small portions of the KNE site associated within the drier, regenerating scrub
edges are considered Chronically Threatened with less than 20% indigenous cover
remaining on a national scale.
Wetlands are now considered an uncommon habitat type in the Wellington region
with less than 3% remaining of their original extent 8.
Taupō Swamp is considered to be a nationally representative example of a
topogenous 1 lowland freshwater mire (peat forming wetland), a wetland type
1 A type of bog that forms under climatic conditions of reduced rainfall, with consequent lower humidity
and summer drought, which restrict the growth of Sphagnum to areas where precipitation is
concentrated (eg, valley bottoms).
7
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
characteristic of lowlands in New Zealand, and a wetland type that is uncommon in the
Wellington region 9,10.
Rarity/distinctiveness
Taupō swamp has regionally unique and diverse vegetation across different stages of
natural succession 11. The swamp is an example of an unusual type of wetland, having
been formed by the uplifting of the seabed during an earthquake. It is one of only a
few lowland topogenous mires in the Wellington Ecological District that have retained
a largely indigenous vegetation cover 12.
Two plant, three bird and six freshwater fish species recorded within the KNE site are
recognised as having a national threat status. In addition three plant species have a
regional threat status. Appendix 2 and 3 contains a list of threatened species found
within the KNE site.
Diversity
The Singers and Rogers classification of pre-human ecosystems in New Zealand13
indicates that three ecosystem types were present within the KNE site. These were
flaxland (WL18) and raupō reedland (WL19) within the swamp areas, grading out to
kohekohe-tawa forest (MF6). Aspects of these original ecosystems types are still
evident within the KNE site today, although in a modified and regenerating condition.
The latest vegetation survey within the Taupō Swamp indicated that the KNE site is
highly diverse with as many as ten vegetation communities present 14.
Ecological context
Wetlands are considered a national priority for conservation as an ecosystem type that
has become uncommon on a national scale primarily due to human activity 15.
The swamp complex supports a number of threatened plant and wetland bird species
and a sizable population of indigenous freshwater fish.
4.3.
Ecological features
Habitats (vegetation)
Taupō Swamp is dominated by swamp flax with occasional emergent cabbage trees or
tī kōuka (Cordyline australis) and supports an array of wetland vegetation
communities16. In the low lying wetter areas, swamp flax and raupō (Typha orientalis)
are present, while toetoe (Austroderia toetoe), bracken fern (Pteridium esculentum),
mānuka (Leptospermum scoparium) and māhoe (Melicytus ramiflorous) prefer the
drier conditions on the swamp edges. Rare plants found deep in the swamp include
swamp nettle (Urtica linearifolia) and swamp buttercup (Rananculus macropus) 17. The
northern end of Taupō swamp is drier and there are more trees species present.
Rautahi (Carex geminata) dominates large areas, but areas of flax are also present. The
southern end of the wetland has large areas of raupō and rautahi with areas of open
water. Taupō Stream runs through the swamp, mainly on the eastern side.
Whenua Tapu Swamp, Taupō Swamp West B and Taupō Swamp West D are largely
dominated by swamp flax with toetoe and mānuka developing on the drier edges.
8
Taupō Swamp Complex
However, access to these wetlands is difficult and as a result they have not been
surveyed or regularly visited for some time and so may have changed species
composition. Whenua Tapu Swamp was noted on a recent visit as containing
regenerating original forest species including kohokohe (Dysoxylum spectabile), tawa
(Beilschmiedia tawa) and tree fuchsia (Fuchsia excorticata) 18. These wetlands were
thought to contain up to eleven regionally uncommon plant species that are were
present in Taupō Swamp 19, however fire may have affected the presence of these
species today. The area at the southern end of Taupō Swamp West B differs from the
surrounding wetland habitat as it is dominated by rushes such as baumea (Machaerina
rubiginosa) and contains uncommon species such as gratiola (Gratiola sexdentata),
native bedstraw (Galium trilobum) and swamp willowherb (Epilobium pallidiflorum) 20.
Species
Birds
The KNE site is considered an important site for wetland birds and has records of
threatened wetland species including Australasian bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus),
marsh crake (Porzana pusilla affinis) and spotless crake (Porzana tabuensis
tabuensis) 21,22. Spotless crake were recorded as present within Taupō Swamp as
recently as 2015 in surveys funded by QEII 23.
In addition, more common species such as grey warbler (Greygone igata), kingfisher
(Todiramphus santus vagans), little shag (Phalacrocorax melanoleucos) and paradise
shelduck (Tadorna variegata) are also present within the KNE site.
Reptiles
Raukawa gecko (Woodworthia maculata) was found to be present in a recent QEII
funded survey24.
Fish
Taupō Stream and its tributaries are recognised for their value to native freshwater
fish. Fish surveys conducted within the KNE site have recorded several species of
native fish including brown mudfish (Neochanna apoda), giant kōkopu (Galaxias
argenteus), banded kōkopu (Galaxias fasciatus), inanga (Galaxias maculatus), longfin
eel (Anguilla dieffenbachii), shortfin eel (Anguilla australis), redfin bully (Gobiomorphus
huttoni), common bully (Gobiomorphus cotidianus), giant bully (Gobiomorphus
gobioides), bluegill bully (Gobiomorphus hubbsi) and common smelt (Retropinna
retropinna) 25,26.
9
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
5. Threats to ecological values at the KNE site
Ecological values can be threatened by human activities, and by introduced animals
and plants that change ecosystem dynamics. The key to protecting and restoring
biodiversity as part of the KNE programme is to manage threats to the ecological
values at each KNE site.
5.1.
Key threats
Given the dynamic nature of wetland ecosystems, any change to the hydrological
regime is likely to impact the KNE site. The KNE site has been adversely affected by
historical activities such as railway, road and industrial development severing the
wetland complex into multiple swamps and altering the hydrology. Features within the
surrounding environment such as urbanisation, agricultural practices and road
development schemes continue to threaten the site’s hydrology. Such threats may also
introduce pollutants and/or cause sedimentation to the swamp complex and stream.
Ecological weeds are widespread throughout the KNE site and include climbing,
woody, ground-covering and aquatic weeds (see Appendix 4). These are known to
displace native species and prevent natural regeneration of the vegetation
communities. Additionally, ecological weed species such as willows (Salix spp.) are also
known to alter the hydrology of wetland ecosystems.
Pest animals such as mustelids (Mustela spp.), rats (Rattus spp.), possums (Trichosurus
vulpecula) and hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) are known to predate native bird
species and other fauna such as lizards and invertebrates. These pest species are likely
to be present within the KNE site.
While the key threats discussed in this section are recognised as the most significant, a
number of other threats to the KNE site’s values have also been identified. Table 2
presents a summary of all known threats to the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
(including those discussed above), detailing which operational areas they affect, how
each threat impacts on ecological values, and whether they will be addressed by
management activities.
Table 2: Summary of all threats to ecological values present at the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
Threat code
Threat and impact on biodiversity in the KNE site
Location
Ground covering ecological weeds smother and displace native
vegetation, inhibit indigenous regeneration, and alter vegetation
structure and composition. Key weed species for control include
Pampas grass (Cortaderia jubata and C. selloana), montbretia
(Crocosmia × crocosmiiflora), Tradescantia (Tradescantia
fluminensis) and Arum lily (Zantedeschia aethiopica). See full list
in Appendix 4
Entire KNE
Site
Woody weed species displace native vegetation, inhibit
indigenous regeneration, and alter vegetation structure and
composition. Key weed species include willow species (Salix spp.),
gorse (Ulex europaeus) and wattle species (Acacia spp.). See full
list in Appendix 4
Entire KNE
Site
Ecological weeds
EW-1
EW-2
10
Taupō Swamp Complex
Threat code
Threat and impact on biodiversity in the KNE site
Location
EW-3
Climbing weeds smother and displace native vegetation often
causing canopy collapse, inhibit indigenous regeneration, and
alter vegetation structure and composition. Key weed species
include old man’s beard (Clematis vitalba), Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica) and blackberry (Rubus fruticosus agg.). See
full list in Appendix 4
Entire KNE
site
Aquatic weeds out-compete native aquatic species and choke
watercourses. Key weed species include water celery (Apium
nodiflorum), monkey musk (Erythranthe guttata) and cape
pondweed (Aponogeton distachyos). See full list in Appendix 4
Entire KNE
site
EW-4*
Pest animals
27
PA-1
Hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) prey on native invertebrates ,
28
29
30
lizards and the eggs and chicks of ground-nesting birds
Entire KNE
site
PA-2*
House mice (Mus musculus) browse native fruit, seeds and
vegetation, and prey on invertebrates. They compete with native
fauna for food and can reduce forest regeneration. They also
31,32
prey on invertebrates, lizards and small eggs and nestlings
Entire KNE
site
PA-3
Possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) browse palatable canopy
33,34
. This destroys the
vegetation until it can no longer recover
forest’s structure, diversity and function. Possums may also prey
35
on native birds and invertebrates
Entire KNE
site
PA-4
Rats (Rattus spp.) browse native fruit, seeds and vegetation. They
compete with native fauna for food and can reduce forest
regeneration. They also prey on invertebrates, lizards and native
36,37
birds
Entire KNE
site
PA-5
Mustelids (stoats
(Mustela erminea), ferrets
(M. furo) and
42,43
(M. nivalis)) prey on native birds, lizards and
weasels
invertebrates, reducing their breeding success and potentially
causing local extinctions
PA-6*
Feral and domestic cats (Felis catus) prey on native birds ,
45
46
lizards and invertebrates , reducing native fauna breeding
47
success and potentially causing local extinctions
Entire KNE
site
PA-7*
Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) and hares (Lepus europaeus)
graze on palatable native vegetation and prevent natural
48
regeneration in some environments . In drier times hares
especially, will penetrate into wetland forest areas browsing and
reducing regenerating native seedlings
Entire KNE
site
PA-8*
Wasps (Vespula spp.) adversely impact native invertebrates and
49
birds through predation and competition for food resources
Entire KNE
site
PA-9*
Brown trout (Salmo trutta) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus
mykiss) prey on native fish and compete with them for food
50
resources
Taupō
Stream
38,39
40,41
44
Entire KNE
site
11
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
Threat code
Threat and impact on biodiversity in the KNE site
Location
HA-1*
A barrier (weir) to native fish passage has been identified in
Taupō Stream within the KNE site preventing juvenile migrating
fish from migrating upstream
Taupō
Stream
HA-2*
Land use activities that alter the local hydrology, such as
development schemes and sub-divisions can affect the water
levels that sustain wetland ecosystems. These activities are also
known to cause sedimentation and add pollutants to wetlands
Entire KNE
site
HA-3*
The industrial area immediately to the south of Taupō Swamp has
51
previously been a source of pollution in the Taupō Stream . Poor
water quality can affect a range of species in the estuary and
stream. High nutrient levels and contaminants within
watercourses are often caused by upstream land management
practices and pollution events including development practices,
forestry and agricultural practices, road run-off and storm water
entering the watercourse, and sceptic tank leakages
Entire KNE
site
Garden waste dumping can lead to pest plant invasions. Common
species include tradescantia (Tradescantia fluminensis),
agapanthus (Agapanthus praecox) and montbretia (Crocosmia ×
crocosmiiflora)
Entire KNE
site
Human activities
HA-4*
*Threats marked with an asterisk are not addressed by actions in the operational plan.
The codes alongside each threat correspond to activities listed in the operational plan
(Table 3), and are used to ensure that actions taken are targeted to specific threats.
12
Taupō Swamp Complex
6. Management objectives
Objectives help to ensure that management activities carried out are actually
contributing to improvements in the ecological condition of the site.
The following objectives will guide the management activities at the Taupō Swamp
Complex KNE site.
1. To improve the structure* and function† of native plant communities
2. To improve the habitat for native birds
3. To improve the habitat for native freshwater fish
* The living and non-living physical features of an ecosystem. This includes the size, shape, complexity, condition
and the diversity of species and habitats within the ecosystem.
† The biological processes that occur in an ecosystem. This includes seed dispersal, natural regeneration and the
provision of food and habitat for animals.
7. Management activities
Management activities are targeted to work towards the objectives above (Section 6)
by responding to the threats outlined in Section 5. The broad approach to
management activities is described briefly below, and specific actions, with budget
figures attached, are set out in the operational plan (Table 3).
It is important to note that not all threats identified in Section 5 can be adequately
addressed (indicated by an asterisk in Table 1). This can be for a number of reasons
including financial, legal, or capacity restrictions.
7.1.
Ecological weed control
The KNE site contains a range of ecological weed species. See Appendix 4 for a full list
of species for control in the KNE site. The purpose of ecological weed control
undertaken at the KNE site is to limit the impact of the weed species, maintaining
biodiversity values and facilitating natural functioning of the ecosystem, including
hydrology. Both ground-based and aerial-based control methods are required within
identified operational areas of this KNE site to ensure the biodiversity values are
maintained (see Appendix 1, Map 3 for operational areas).
Ground-based weed control
Where access is permissible on foot GWRC will control invasive non-native species
with a high ecological impact on the edges of Taupō swamp. This will ensure that these
species do not invade the swamp interior and also help protect the regenerating scrub
vegetation on the swamp edges.
Ground-based weed control (ie, using hand-powered knapsack or gun and hose
herbicide applicator) will be undertaken in the following operational areas:
•
Operational area A: Annual multi-species weed sweep of Plimmerton Domain, Whenua
Tapu Swamp and the adjoining scrubland along the railway corridor. See Appendix 4
for ecological weed list
13
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
•
•
•
Operational area B: Annual Japanese honeysuckle ground based control, progressively
controlling from railway corridor into Taupō Swamp
Operational area C: Multi species weed sweep along the eastern edge of Taupō Swamp
within NZTA land. See Appendix 4 for ecological weed list
Site-wide control of blackberry from the KNE site edges where accessible and in Year 2
(2017/18) where aerial-based weed control operations cannot access
Aerial-based weed control
Following an aerial survey of the KNE site in 2016, willow species, pampas, and
blackberry have been identified for targeted control. The purpose of this operation will
be to reduce the negative impact of these weed species which are known to affect the
ecological integrity of wetlands. It is expected that natural regeneration of appropriate
native species will occur following the control of these targeted weed species.
GWRC will undertake the aerial application of herbicide by helicopter to control willow
species, pampas, and blackberry within Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site. Resource
consent is required for this activity and will be applied for by GWRC’s Biodiversity
department.
Given the identified health and safety concerns of accessing these operational areas on
foot, aerial control is a commonly used technique and considered the most practical
method for weed control in this type of environment. Aerial control will target isolated
infestations of weeds using a spot spray applicator that will reduce the risk of nontarget damage and result in less chemical herbicide being applied within the wetland.
Compared to ground-based application methods, such as a gun and hose application,
aerial control is a more targeted method for applying chemical in these conditions.
GWRC’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for aerial herbicide application will be
adhered to fully, ensuring that the operation is managed and undertaken in
accordance with GWRC procedure, and avoiding or keeping to a minimum the adverse
impacts of herbicide application in this environment.
Aerial control will be undertaken within the operational areas outlined below:
•
•
Operational Area D: Aerial control of blackberry using Triclopyr (Garlon 360) in
January-February in Year 1 of this KNE plan (resource consent permitting)
Operational Area E: Aerial control of willow and pampas species using Glyphosate
(Round-up) in January-February of Year 1 of this KNE plan (resource consent
permitting)
Aerial control operations may be required in future years to manage any regrowth of
willows, pampas and blackberry across the KNE site. Resource consent will be applied
for, for a 10 year period, to cover this activity. However, should there not be enough
regrowth to warrant an aerial control operation during this period this method will not
be utilised. This will be determined by the GWRC’s Biodiversity department prior to
any aerial control operation being agreed.
As required by any resource consent conditions the effects of an aerial application of
herbicide to the wetland will be monitored. The results of this monitoring will inform
the adaptive management of any future aerial application requirements and will also
14
Taupō Swamp Complex
be discussed with the appropriate authority and landowners prior to future aerial
control.
7.2.
Pest animal control
Pest animal control is undertaken within the KNE site and surrounding buffer zone
areas (see Appendix 1, Map 4) and aims to reduce possums, rats and mustelids to low
numbers, thereby reducing the foliage browsing pressure on the native vegetation to
allow regeneration. Pest animal control also aims to reduce the predation threat to
native birds and lizards. The pest animal network extends outside of the KNE site
(within identified buffer zones) to control pest animal populations that may reinvade
the KNE site.
The onsite pest animal control network consists of poison bait stations and a network
of DOC 200 kill-traps. Possums and rats are controlled by the poison bait stations
whilst mustelids and hedgehogs are controlled by the DOC 200 kill-traps. The bait
station and kill-trap network will be serviced every three-months by GWRC biosecurity
staff.
7.3.
Monitoring
QEII have an annual management budget allocation for the KNE site. Previously they
have monitored wetland bird species, lizard species and undertaken vegetation
mapping within the KNE site. Further monitoring is proposed to be undertaken within
the KNE site during the 3-year period covered by this plan. If undertaken the results of
any monitoring surveys will be used to inform management activities and operational
areas identified within this plan.
7.4.
Community engagement
The KNE site is recognised as an important site to Ngāti Toa Rangatira (see section 3.3).
During the life-time of this KNE plan the landowners and partners of the KNE site will
support the Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira on behalf of Ngāti Toa to host an event aimed
at re-connecting their iwi members with Taupō Swamp and its traditional values.
15
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
8. Operational plan
The operational plan shows the actions planned to achieve the stated objectives for the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site, and their timing and
cost over the three-year period from 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2019. The budget for the 2017/18 and 2018/19 years are indicative only and
subject to change. A map of operational areas can be found in Appendix 1 (see Map 3).
Table 4: Three-year operational plan for the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
Objective
Threat
Activity
Operational
area
Delivery
Description/detail
Target
Timetable and resourcing
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
1
EW 3
Ecological
weed
control
B
GWRC
Biosecurity
department
Progressive targeted control of
Japanese honeysuckle
Reduction in distribution
and abundance of target
species
$3,000
$3,000
$4,000
1
EW 1-3
Ecological
weed
control
D, E
GWRC
Biosecurity
department
Aerial control of willow, blackberry and
pampas in Year 1. The need for followup control in Year 3 and whether it be
aerial or ground-based will be
confirmed by a GWRC Biodiversity
Officer
Reduction in distribution
and abundance of target
species
$5,000
Nil
$5,000
1
EW 1-3
Ecological
weed
control
C
GWRC
Biosecurity
department
Multi-species control of ecological
weeds (see list in Appendix 4) along
NZTA land
Reduction in distribution
and abundance of target
species
$3,000
$3,000
Nil
1
EW 3
Ecological
weed
control
Site-wide
GWRC
Biosecurity
department
Targeted gun and hose control of
blackberry that cannot be controlled via
aerial operation
Reduction in distribution
and abundance of target
species
Nil
$5,000
Nil
1
EW 1-3
Ecological
weed
control
A
GWRC
Biosecurity
department
Multi-species control of ecological
weeds (see list in appendix 4) along
Plimmerton Domain edge, Whenua
Tapu Swamp and adjoining areas of
scrubland along the railway corridor
Reduction in distribution
and abundance of target
species
$5,000
$5,000
$7,000
16
Taupō Swamp Complex
Objective
1,2,3
1,2,3
Total
Threat
PA
1,3,4,5
N/A
Activity
Pest animal
control
Monitoring
Operational
area
Delivery
Description/detail
Entire KNE
site & buffer
zones
GWRC
Biosecurity
department
Service pest animal network every three
months
Entire KNE
site
QEII Trust
Annual monitoring to target wetland
vegetation communities, birds, reptiles
and hydrology as deemed necessary by
QEII
Target
Possums <5% RTC *
Timetable and resourcing
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$3,000
$3,000
$3,000
$23,500
$23,500
$23,500
Rats <10% TTI**
Mustelids <5% TTI**
Better understanding the
ecological communities
of swamp
*RTC = Residual Trap Catch. The control regime has been designed to control possums to this level but monitoring will not be undertaken. Experience in the use of this control method
indicates this target will be met.
**TTI = Tracking Tunnel Index. The control regime has been designed to control rats/mustelids to this level but monitoring will not be undertaken. Experience in the use of this control method
indicates this target will be met.
17
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
9. Funding contributions
9.1.
Budget allocated by GWRC
The budget for the 2017/18 and 2018/19 years are indicative only and subject to
change.
Table 5: GWRC allocated budget for the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
Management activity
Timetable and resourcing
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
Ecological weed control
$11,000
$11,000
$11,000
Pest animal control
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$15,500
$15,500
$15,500
Total
9.2.
Budget allocated by Porirua City Council
The budget for the 2017/18 and 2018/19 years are indicative only and subject to
change.
Table 6: Additional allocated budget for the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site from Porirua City Council
Management activity
Timetable and resourcing
Ecological weed control
Total
9.3.
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
Budget allocated by QEII National Trust
The budget has not been accounted for in the operational plan as it is indicative only
and subject to change and to an annual management review of site monitoring
requirements.
Table 7: Additional allocated budget for the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site from QEII National Trust
Management activity
Timetable and resourcing
Monitoring
Total
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
*Funding is subject to annual management review and final quantity is subject to change.
18
Taupō Swamp Complex
9.4.
Budget allocated by Kiwirail
The budget for the 2017/18 and 2018/19 years are indicative only and subject to
change.
Table 8: Additional allocated budget for the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site from Kiwirail
Management activity
Timetable and resourcing
Ecological weed control
Total
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
$3,000*
*Funding is allocated annually by KiwiRail and as such the funding of this project will be subject to
annual review. The final sum allocated may change.
19
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
Appendix 1: Site maps
Map 1: The Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site boundary
20
Taupō Swamp Complex
Map 2: Land ownership boundaries for the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
21
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
Map 3: Ecological weed control operational areas in the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
22
Taupō Swamp Complex
Map 4: Pest animal control in the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
23
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
Appendix 2: Nationally threatened species list
The New Zealand Threat Classification System lists species according to their threat of
extinction. The status of each species group (plants, reptiles etc) is assessed over a
three-year cycle 52, with the exception of birds which are assessed on a five-year
cycle 53. Species are regarded as Threatened if they are classified as Nationally Critical,
Nationally Endangered or Nationally Vulnerable. They are regarded as At Risk if they
are classified as Declining, Recovering, Relict or Naturally Uncommon. The following
table lists Threatened and At Risk species that are resident in, or regular visitors to, the
Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site.
Table 9: Threatened and At Risk species at the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
Scientific name
Common name
Threat status
Observation
Ranunculus
macropus
Swamp buttercup
Data Deficient
Bagnall & Ogle
55
Urtica linearifolia
Swamp nettle
At Risk - Declining
Bagnall & Ogle
56
Australasian Bittern
Threatened - Nationally
Endangered
Parrish 1984 ; Clelland
59
1984 ; Todd et all.
60
2013
At Risk - Relict
Parrish 1984; Clelland
1984;McArthur and
61
Lawson 2013
At Risk - Relict
Parrish 1984; Clelland
1984; McArthur and
Lawson 2013
Plants(vascular)
Birds
54
57
Botaurus
poiciloptilus
Porzana pusilla
Marsh crake
Porzana tabuensis
Spotless crake
Freshwater fish
58
62
Anguilla
dieffenbachii
Longfin eel
At Risk - Declining
Hicks
Galaxias argenteus
Giant kokopu
At Risk - Declining
Hicks
Galaxias maculatus
Inanga
At Risk - Declining
Hicks
Gobiomorphus
hubbsi
Bluegill bully
At Risk - Declining
Hicks
Gobiomorphus
huttoni
Redfin bully
At Risk - Declining
Hicks
Neochanna apoda
Brown mudfish
At Risk - Declining
Hicks
24
63
Taupō Swamp Complex
Appendix 3: Regionally threatened plant species list
The following table lists regionally threatened plant species that have been recorded in
the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site. Native plant species have been identified in the
Plant Conservation Strategy, Wellington Conservancy 2004-2010 64.
Table 10: Regionally threatened plant species recorded in the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
Scientific name
Common name
Threat status
Observation
Epilobium
chionanthum
Marsh willowweed
Gradual decline
Bagnall & Ogle
Epilobium pallidiflorum
Swamp willowherb
Sparse
Smith 2013
Galium trilobum
Native bedstraw
Data deficient
Smith 2013
Plants
65
66
67
25
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
Appendix 4: Ecological weed species
The following table lists key ecological weed species that have been recorded in the
Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site.
Table 11: Ecological weed species recorded in the Taupō Swamp Complex KNE site
Scientific Name
Common Name
Weed Tier
Ecological Weed
Impact at KNE Site
Acacia spp.
Wattle
Woody weed
Moderate
Acer pseudoplatanus
Sycamore
Woody weed
High
Agapanthus praecox subsp.
orientalis
Agapanthus
Groundcover
Moderate
Apium nodiflorum
Water celery
Marginal aquatic
Moderate
Aponogeton distachyos
Cape pond weed
Aquatic weed
Moderate
Asparagus scandens
Climbing asparagus
Climber
Moderate
Asparagus setaceus
Asparagus fern
Climber
Severe
Berberis glaucocarpa
Barberry
Woody weed
Low
Bidens frondosa
Beggars ticks
Marginal aquatic
Moderate
Buddleja davidii
Buddleia
Woody weed
Low
Calystegia silvatica.
Bindweed
Climber
Low
Chamaecytisus palmensis
Tree lucerne
Woody weed
Low
Clematis vitalba
Old man’s beard
Climber
Severe
Cortaderia jubata
Purple pampas grass
Exotic grass
Moderate
Cortaderia selloana
Pampas
Exotic grass
Moderate
Corynocarpus laevigatus**
Karaka
Woody weed
High
Cotoneaster spp.
Cotoneaster
Woody weed
Moderate
Crataegus monogyna
Hawthorn
Woody weed
Moderate
Crocosmia × crocosmiiflora
Montbretia
Groundcover
Low
Cupressus macrocarpa
Macrocarpa
Woody weed
Low
Erythranthe guttata
Monkey musk
Marginal aquatic
Low
Eucalyptus spp.
Gum trees
Woody weed
Low
Foeniculum vulgare
Fennel
Groundcover
Low
Glyceria maxima
Reed sweetgrass
Aquatic weed
High
Gunnera tinctoria
Chilean rhubarb
Groundcover
Moderate
Hedera helix
Ivy
Climber
Severe
Hedychium spp.
Ginger
Groundcover
Severe
Hydrangea macrophylla
Hydrangea
Groundcover
Low
Ilex aquifolium
Holly
Woody weed
High
Ipomoea indica
Blue morning glory
Climber
High
26
Taupō Swamp Complex
Scientific Name
Common Name
Weed Tier
Ecological Weed
Impact at KNE Site
Lonicera japonica
Japanese honeysuckle
Climber
High
Lupinus arboreus
Tree lupin
Woody weed
Low
Lycium ferocissimum
Boxthorn
Woody weed
Moderate
Metrosideros excelsa**
Pohutukawa
Woody weed
Low
Paraserianthes lophantha
Brush wattle
Woody weed
Moderate
Passiflora spp.
Banana passionfruit
Climber
Severe
Pinus nigra
Black pine
Woody weed
Low
Pinus radiata
Radiata pine
Woody weed
Low
Pittosporum crassifolium**
Karo
Woody weed
Low
Populus alba
Silver poplar
Woody weed
high
Populus nigra
Lombardy poplar
Woody weed
Moderate
Prunus × domestica
Plum
Woody weed
Low
Prunus spp.
Cherry
Woody weed
High
Quercus spp.
Oak
Woody weed
Low
Rhododendron ponticum
Rhododendron
Woody weed
Moderate
Rubus fruticosus agg.
Blackberry
Climber
High
Salix spp.
Willow
Woody weed
Severe
Sambucus nigra
Elder
Woody weed
Low
Selaginella kraussiana
Selaginella
Groundcover
High
Solanum pseudocapsicum
Jerusalem cherry
Woody weed
Low
Tradescantia fluminensis
Tradescantia
Groundcover
High
Ulex europaeus
Gorse
Woody weed
High
Zantedeschia aethiopica
Arum lily
Groundcover
High
*Ecological impact at the KNE site defined by GWRC Biodiversity Officer
** Non-local native plants
27
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
References
1
Greater Wellington Regional Council. 2016. Biodiversity Strategy 2015-25. 25 p.
Wildlands. 2015. Ecological evaluation of Taupo Swamp, Plimmerton. Contract report No. 3678.
3
Cromarty P, Scott DA (eds). 1995. A Directory of Wetlands in New Zealand. Department of
Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand
4
Porirua City Reserves Management Plan. http://www.pcc.govt.nz/Publications/Reserves-ManagementPlan
5
Greater Wellington Regional Council. 2015. Proposed Natural Resources Plan for the Wellington Region
6
Porirua City Council. District Plan http://www.pcc.govt.nz/Publications/District-Plan
7
Walker S, Cieraad E, Grove P, Lloyd K, Myers S, Park T, Porteous T. 2007 Guide for users of the
threatened environment classification, Version 11, August 2007 Landcare Research New Zealand. 34p
plus appendix.
8
Ausseil A-G, Gerbeaux P, Chadderton W, Stephens T, Brown D, Leathwick J. 2008. Wetland ecosystems
of national importance for biodiversity. Landcare Research Contract Report LC0708/158 for Chief
Scientist, Department of Conservation.
9
Wildlands. 2015. Ecological evaluation of Taupo Swamp, Plimmerton. Contract report No. 3678.
10
http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/science-and-technical/nzwetlands08.pdf
11
Bagnall RG, Ogle CC. 1981. The changing vegetation structure and composition of a mire at
Plimmerton, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany 19:371-387
12
Cromarty P, Scott DA. (eds). 1995. A Directory of Wetlands in New Zealand. Department of
Conservation,
Wellington,
New
Zealand
http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/science-andtechnical/nzwetlands08.pdf
13
Singers NJD, Rogers GM. 2014 A classification of New Zealand's terrestrial ecosystems Science for
Conservation No 325 Department of Conservation, Wellington. 87p
14
Clelland D. 1984. Plant checklist for Plimmerton (taupo) Swamp. Unprotected natural areas of the
Wellington region. A survey of eleven areas of biological significance.
15
Ministry for the Environment. 2007. Protecting our Places – introducing the national priorities for
protecting rare and threatened native biodiversity on private land. ME799.
16
Moar NT. 1949. A study of some mires in the South wellington Province. Victoria University
Unpublished MSc thesis.
17
http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/science-and-technical/nzwetlands08.pdf
18
Mike Urlich, Greater Wellington Regional Council. Pers obs 2016.
19
Bagnall RG, Ogle CC. 1981. The changing vegetation structure and composition of a mire at
Plimmerton, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany 19:371-387
20
Robyn Smith, Greater Wellington Regional Council, pers comm 2015.
21
Todd M, Kettles H, Graeme C, Sawyer J, McEwan M, Adams L. (2013). Estuarine systems in the lower
North Island: ranking of significance, current status and future management options. Department of
Conservation.
22
McArthur N, Lawson J. 2013. Coastal and freshwater habitats of significance for rare and threatened
bird species in the Wellington region. Greater Wellington Regional Council.
23
Small D. 2015. Final report on the baseline survey of wetland birds at Taupo Swamp, Plimmerton,
Wellington. Prepared for the Queen Elizabeth II National Trust.
24
Ecogecko. 2016. Lizard survey of Taupo Swamp. Unpublished report.
25
Queen Elizabeth National Trust.1989. Taupo Swamp Plimmerton Management Plan.
26
Leigh S. 2005. Fish pass evaluation – Taupo Stream. Prepared in association with Massey University
and Greater Wellington Regional Council.
27
Jones C, Sanders MD. 2005. European hedgehog. In: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand
mammals. 2nd edition. Melbourne, Oxford University Press. Pp. 81–94
28
Spitzen-van der Sluijs AM, Spitzen J, Houston D, Stumpel AHP. 2009. Skink predation by hedgehogs at
Macraes Flat, Otago, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 33(2): 205-207.
29
Jones C, Moss K, Sanders M. 2005. Diet of hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) in the upper Waitaki
Basin, New Zealand. Implications for conservation. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 29(1): 29-35.
30
Jones C, Sanders MD. 2005. European hedgehog. In: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand
mammals. 2nd edition. Melbourne, Oxford University Press. Pp. 81–94.
2
28
Taupō Swamp Complex
31
Ruscoe WA, Murphy EC. 2005. House mouse. In: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand
mammals. Oxford University Press. Pp. 204-221.
32
Newman DG. 1994. Effect of a mouse Mus musculus eradication programme and habitat change on
lizard populations on Mana Island, New Zealand, with special reference to McGregor’s skink, Cyclodina
macgregori. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 21: 443-456.
33
Pekelharing CJ, Parkes JP, Barker RJ. 1998. Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) densities and impacts on
fuchsia (Fuchsia excorticata) in South Westland, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 22(2):
197-203.
34
Nugent G, Sweetapple P, Coleman J, Suisted P. 2000. Possum feeding patterns. dietary tactics of a
reluctant folivore. In: Montague TL ed. The brushtail possum: Biology, impact and management of an
introduced marsupial. Lincoln, Manaaki Whenua Press. Pp. 10-19.
35
Sweetapple PJ, Fraser KW, Knightbridge PI. 2004. Diet and impacts of brushtail possum populations
across the invasion front in South Westland, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 28(1): 19-33.
36
Daniel MJ. 1973. Seasonal diet of the ship rat (Rattus r. rattus) in lowland forest in New Zealand.
Proceedings of the New Zealand Ecological Society 20: 21-30.
37
Innes JG. 2005. Ship rat. In: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand mammals. Oxford University
Press. Pp.187-203.
38
Murphy E, Maddigan F, Edwards B, Clapperton K. 2008. Diet of stoats at Okarito Kiwi Sanctuary, South
Westland, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 32(1): 41-45.
39
King CM, Murphy EC 2005. Stoat. in: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand mammals. Oxford
University Press. Pp.261-287.
40
Ragg JR. 1998. Intraspecific and seasonal differences in the diet of feral ferrets (Mustela furo) in a
pastoral habitat, east Otago, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 22(2): 113 – 119.
41
Clapperton BK, Byron A. 2005. Feral ferret. In: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand mammals.
Oxford University Press. Pp.294-307.
42
King CM. 2005. Weasel. In: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand mammals. Oxford University
Press. Pp.287-294.
43
King CM, Flux M, Innes JG, Fitzgerald BM. 1996. Population biology of small mammals in Pureora
Forest Park: 1. Carnivores (Mustela erminea, M.furo, M.nivalis and Felis catus). New Zealand Journal of
Ecology 20(2): 241 – 251.
44
King CM, Flux M, Innes JG, Fitzgerald BM. 1996. Population biology of small mammals in Pureora
Forest Park: 1. Carnivores (Mustela erminea, M.furo, M.nivalis and Felis catus). New Zealand Journal of
Ecology 20(2): 241 – 251.
45
Reardon JT, Whitmore N, Holmes KM, Judd LM, Hutcheon AD, Norbury G, Mackenzie DI. 2012.
Predator control allows critically endangered lizards to recover on mainland New Zealand. New Zealand
Journal of Ecology 36(2): 141 – 150.
46
King CM, Flux M, Innes JG, Fitzgerald BM. 1996. Population biology of small mammals in Pureora
Forest Park: 1. Carnivores (Mustela erminea, M.furo, M.nivalis and Felis catus). New Zealand Journal of
Ecology 20(2): 241 – 251.
47
Gillies C, Fitzgerald BM. 2005. Feral cat. In: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand mammals.
Oxford University Press. Pp.308-326.
48
Norbury G, Flux JEC 2005. Brown hare. in: King CM ed. The handbook of New Zealand mammals.
Oxford University Press. Pp.151-158.
49
Beggs JR. 2001. The ecological consequences of social wasps (Vespula spp.) invading an ecosystem
that has an abundant carbohydrate resource. Biological Conservation 99: 17– 28
50
McIntosh AR, McHugh PA, Dunn NR, Goodman JM, Howard SW, Jellyman PG, O’Brien LK, Nystrom P,
Woodford DJ. 2010. The impact of trout on galaxiid fishes in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of
Ecology 34(1). 195-206.
51
Todd M, Graeme C, Kettles H, Sawyer J. 2012. Estuaries in Wellington Hawke’s Bay Conservancy
52
Department of Conservation. 2008. New Zealand Threat Classification System manual
53
Hugh Robertson, Department of Conservation, pers comm 2015.
54
de Lange PJ, Rolfe JR, Champion PD, Courtney SP, Heenan PB, Barkla JW, Cameron EK, Norton DA,
Hitchmough RA 2013. Conservation status of New Zealand indigenous vascular plants, 2012. New
Zealand Threat Classification Series 3. 70 p.
29
Key Native Ecosystem Plan
55
Bagnall RG, Ogle CC. 1981. The changing vegetation structure and composition of a lowland mire at
Plimmerton, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany, Vol. 19: 371-387.
56
Bagnall RG., Ogle CC. 1981. The changing vegetation structure and composition of a lowland mire at
Plimmerton, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany, Vol. 19: 371-387.
57
Robertson HA, Dowding JE, Elliot GP, Hitchmough RA, Miskelly CM, O’Donnell CFS, Powlesland RG,
Sagar PM, Scofield P, Taylor GA. 2013. Conservation status of New Zealand birds, 2012. New Zealand
Threat Classification Series 4. 22 p.
58
Parrish G. 1984. Wildlife and wildlife sites of the Wellington region. Fauna survey unit Report No. 38.
New Zealand Wildlife Service, Wellington.
59
Clelland D. 1984. Unprotected areas of the Wellington region. A survey of eleven areas of biological
significance. Unpublished report.
60
Todd M, Kettles H, Graeme C, Sawyer J, McEwan M, Adams L. 2013. Estuarine systems in the lower
North Island: ranking of significance, current status and future management options. Department of
Conservation.
61
McArthur N, Lawson J. 2013. Coastal and freshwater habitats of significance for rare and threatened
bird species in the Wellington region. Greater Wellington Regional Council.
62
Goodman JM, Dunn NR, Ravenscroft PJ, Allibone RM, Boubee JAT, David BO, Griffiths M, Ling N,
Hitchmough RA, Rolfe JR. 2014. Conservation status of New Zealand freshwater fish, 2013. New Zealand
Threat Classification Series 7. 12 p.
63
Queen Elizabeth National Trust.1989. Taupo Swamp Plimmerton Management Plan.
64
Sawyer JWD. 2004. Plant conservation strategy, Wellington Conservancy (excluding Chatham Islands),
2004–2010. Department of Conservation, Wellington. 91 p.
65
Sawyer JWD. 2004. Plant Conservation Strategy. Wellington Conservancy (excluding Chatham Islands)
2004-2010. Department of Conservation, Wellington. 91 p.
66
Bagnall RG, Ogle CC. 1981. The changing vegetation structure and composition of a lowland mire at
Plimmerton, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany, Vol. 19: 371-387.
67
Robyn Smith, Greater Wellington Regional Council, pers obs 2013.
30
The Greater Wellington Regional Council’s purpose is to enrich life in the Wellington Region by building resilient, connected
and prosperous communities, protecting and enhancing our natural assets, and inspiring pride in what makes us unique
Greater Wellington Regional Council:
Wellington office
PO Box 11646
Manners Street
Wellington 6142
T 04 384 5708
F 04 385 6960
Upper Hutt office
PO Box 40847
Upper Hutt 5018
Masterton office
PO Box 41
Masterton 5840
T 04 526 4133
F 04 526 4171
T 06 378 2484
F 06 378 2146
Follow the Wellington
Regional Council
[email protected]
www.gw.govt.nz
October 2016
GW/BD-G-16/88