Waihi North Project: Assessment of Terrestrial Ecological Values & Effects 62138 WNP AEE 52 no evidence of podocarp regeneration or of the diversity of broadleaf species to be expected in a natural regeneration of this age and advancement at this site (e.g. kohekohe, titoki, tawa, hinau, pokaka (Elaeocarpus hookerianus), and has a limited array of shrubs, ferns, grasses and herbs and very little in the way of epiphytic flora. It represents the recovery from a highly modified largely pasture vegetation type with limited sources of limited indigenous early seral species. As such and given it is somewhat typical of similar examples of limited farmland regeneration(and not overly similar to a natural process of seral community in a forest disturbance site) we assess this community conservatively as of moderate ranking. Rarity and distinctiveness No rare species have been recorded and no distinctive species or features have been recorded. Again, we do not consider the single pōhutukawa tree, or the kānuka present as triggering the “Threatened” threshold. The single kauri tree (very high value), as with the pōhutukawa, would have been a lone specimen prior to the regeneration of indigenous species around it. We rank this vegetation type to be low with respect to this criterion. Diversity and pattern Species richness is low relative to an expected regenerating broadleaf forest, indeed in total 35 taxa were recorded where it is reasonable to expect over 100. The faunal component also appears to be limited, with no lizards or frogs and the bird (and likely invertebrate) communities’ restricted to common simple habitat species. There are no notable ecological patterns related to environmental gradients and indeed the vegetation community is relatively homogenous. We assess this vegetation type to be low for this criterion. Ecological context The rewarewa forest unit is somewhat fragmented, but the larger area is buffered by the topography of a gully system, although it remains somewhat narrow (200 m). Alone it has only minimal connectivity and network functioning, and has no special resources or habitat quality important to fauna, migratory or resident species. At flowering the rewarewa flowers may be a temporary locally important seasonal resource for tui and perhaps bellbird (although none were detected). Tui were uncommon on site (few recorded from survey) at teh time of the survey and there are much greater nectar resources in the surrounding landscape. The integrity of this habitat is still low, with weeds and a poor resilience to future disturbance and pine invasion. The community is buffered to the north and generally buffered to the east and west, but open to the south to farming effects and edge effects. The contribution to the wider landscape is minimal. We consider the contextual value (ranking) of the rewarewa/towai units to be low. Conclusion With one moderate ranking and the rest low or lower the overall ecological value of the rewarewa units is low. 5.3.1.4 Summary of unit ecological values assessment for SNA 166 (southern fragment) In summary, the ecological values of the components of SNA 166 (southern fragment are generally low to negligible, with an exception being a projection of kauri on the northern side of the fragment, beyond the zone of influence (Table 10).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjE2NDg3