Attachment 1 Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance of Wetlands of the Wellington Region.pdf

Prepared for

by

Report Number W10140-007

Front Cover Photo:
Flax and toe toe tussockland with manuka and emergent cabbage tree, at Te Harakeke Swamp.
Bibliographic reference:
Boffa Miskell Ltd. 2011: Desktop delineation and assessment of significance of wetlands of the wellington region
methodology & results. Prepared for Greater Wellington Regional Council. November 2011. 50p.
Prepared by:
Stephen Fuller

Senior Ecologist - Associate Director

BML
Reviewed by:
Dr Vaughan Keesing
Senior Ecologist - Principal

BML
Document Status:
FINAL
Version:

V.3.
29 November 2011
© Copyright:
This publication is copyright © Greater Wellington Regional Council. Material in it may be reproduced for personal or in-
house use without formal permission or charge, provided suitable acknowledgement is made to this publication and
Greater Wellington Regional Council as the source.

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
1  Introduction
1.1  Background
Greater  Wellington  Regional  Council  is  seeking  to  identify  and  map  wetlands  of  regional
significance.  The  first  stage  of  this  project  is  a  desktop  analysis  and  identification  of  sites,  using
existing  sources  of  information  and  recently  flown,  high  resolution,  aerial  photography  of  the
Wellington Region.
From the desktop analysis, four groups of sites are to be identified.
1.
Sites which are clearly of regional (or greater) importance and which do not require further
field investigation;
2.
Sites  which  are  clearly  of  regional  (or  greater)  importance  but  which  require  further
definition through field investigation;
3.
Sites  which  are  potentially  of  regional  significance,  but  where  information  is  lacking  to
confirm this and additional field investigation is required;
4.
Sites which are clearly not of regional significance and which do not require further study.
This report describes the methods used to:

Identify and delineate wetlands;

Combine and interpret information on each site from the range of datasets available;

Develop significance criteria, and describe the significance of each site;

Develop  a  ranking  system  that  will  assist  in  determining  whether  or  not  each  site  is
regionally significant.
The process undertaken is a form of ranking. It should be noted that there is a risk in ranking sites
that  those  scoring  low  or  very  low  will  be  discarded  as  having  little  or  no  value.  However,  all
wetlands  identified  by  this  study  have  some  value  and  those  that  do  not  meet  the  criteria  for
inclusion as Regionally Significant are still likely to be important within the District.

1.2  Data Sets
A  number  of  data  sets  were  used  for  this  study,  based  on  studies  carried  out  by  a  range  of
organisations over a number of decades. It is considered extremely unlikely that any site of regional
significance will not have been captured and described by one or more of the following data sets.
GIS Layers

GWRC_Wet (n=263 wetland sites);

GWRC_Hydro (n=284);

GWRC_Extent (n=359);

PCC EcoSites (n=211) & Recommended (n=117);

KCDC Ecosites (n=189) & Recommended (n=172);

DOC Ecosites (Wellington Sites, n=2,125);

DOC PNAP Reports (Wellington Sites, n=257);

DOC Conservation Units (Wellington Sites, n=191);

QEII Covenants (Wellington Sites, n=274);

DOC Freshwater Environments of New Zealand FENZ (n=359).

GWRC Aerial Photography (Flown Jan 2010)

GWRC Lidar 1 m contour information (Parts of Kapiti, Lower Hutt, Southern Wairarapa)
References

AUSSEIL et al. Wetlands of National Importance (Wellington Sites, n=34);
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 4

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance

Todd et al, DOC River mouths and Estuaries (Wellington Sites, n=45);

DOC Conservation Management Strategy CMS (Wellington Sites, n=30).

GWRC Tender Document (n=41);

Cromarty & Scott A directory of wetlands in NZ (Wellington Sties, n=2)
Other
Generally the databases used were developed at a national, regional, or district scale. There are a
large number of other potential sources of information that are  usually site specific. These could
not  be  interrogated  within  the  constraints  of  this  study.  These  include  Botanical  Society  species
lists,  OSNZ  species  lists,  university  studies  of  sites,  and  assessments  of  effects  for  development
projects throughout the region.
However the analysis databases have been set up in such a way that information from  additional
sources can be added and the significance assessments updated accordingly.
Overall, it is our view that these additional sources of data will help to refine some aspects of the
assessment,  for example  providing  more  data  on rare plants  or  the  presence  of  native  birds,  but
are unlikely to significantly alter to a major degree the overall assessments of significance.

1.3  Delineation
The  methodology  was  designed  with  repeatability  in  mind.  That  is  another  person  of  equal
experience  presented  with  the  same  data,  both  graphical  and  numeric,  would  produce  a  similar
result. The following steps were followed:
Main Data Set

The process started by merging the two key GWRC data sets, GWRC_Wet and GWRC_Hydro.
These two sets together provided good context for the wetlands, both describing their type
and influences. Together they contained 284 site records.

Wetlands from other datasets that intersected the 284 sites jointly identified in the Regional
Council datasets were then identified and sorted into a master table.

A large number of sites from the various datasets did not intersect, and a process was then
carried  out  of  filtering  sites  where  the  metadata  clearly  indicated  that  no  wetland  was
present or, where the description suggested a wetland was present, by locating and viewing
each site on aerial photographs.

For many sites a decision was made that wetland did not exist (misidentification of bush or
pasture), or that it was entirely artificial (stock ponds) and it was not mapped.

A final dataset of 292 wetlands was developed.

The  master  spreadsheet  was  converted  into  a  Wetland_Potential  GIS  layer  to  direct  the
delineation that followed.
Delineation

For digitising each site, the maximum aerial zoom used was 1:1,000. At higher magnifications
pixilation  of  the  aerial  images  began  to  distort  colour  and  clarity.  Also,  after  some
experimentation, 1:1,000 was determined to provide sufficient accuracy to readily meet the
requirements of the tender, accuracy to 10 m;

The wetland margin was first delineated using image colour and texture as the guide. Colour
was the most obvious delineator of wetland vegetation where there was a graduation from
wetland turf to pasture. Texture was helpful where there was a clear delineation between
grazed  pasture  and  sedge  or  rush  communities,  although  it  is  noted  that  in  the  aerial
photographs rank pasture, especially containing cocksfoot and Yorkshire fog can appear to
have the same texture as wetland sedges and rushes.

When available, 1 m contours (derived from LIDAR) were then used to refine the boundary.
Contours were provided that covered about half of the Kapiti Coast, parts of the Lower Hutt
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 5

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Valley and parts of southern Wairarapa. Where they were available they were very useful in
defining wetland depressions that were otherwise invisible in the colour aerials;

Lakes over 1 ha in area were identified and excluded from the total area of the wetland as
required  by  GWRC.  However,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  lake  habitat  was  included in  the
assessment  of  values  of  the  wetland  proper.  Initially  an  attempt  was  made  to  capture
mudflats  and  gravel  bars  as  part  of  a  wetland  and  not  the  lake.  However,  this  proved
impossible  because  each  waterbody  had  differing  degrees  of  clarity  some  being  highly
turbid, and it became clear that the state of a tide (estuary) and fullness of some lakes and
lagoons  varied.  It  was  therefore  impossible  to  guarantee  consistent  results  within  and
between sites, and a high degree of subjectivity came into play. After some experimentation
it  was  decided  that  the  boundary  of  a  waterbody  would  be  defined  by  the  extent  of
emergent  or  marginal  wetland  vegetation.  Using  the  extent  of  vegetation  ensured a  more
consistent and repeatable approach.

Finally,  decisions  were  made  regarding  the  joining  of  wetland  fragments.  If  two  wetland
fragments  lay  within  50  m  of  each  other  they  were  joined  and  named  as  one.  There  was
often  debate  regarding  the  combination  of  sites  and  several  sites  are  discussed  in  more
detail later in this report.

1.4  Significance Assessment
Three key considerations drove the development of assessment criteria. They were:

The assessment had to be able to be carried out using only the information contained within
the datasets provided, or other readily accessible regional or district inventories.

The  assessment  had  to  take  account  of  sites  where  there  was  no  data  (other  than  aerial
photography).  For  these  sites it  needed  to  provide  some  consistent  criteria  for “potential”
value without introducing speculation and arbitrary decisions.

The assessment had to be repeatable, that is, another ecologist with the same data and the
same assessment criteria would derive the same or similar results.
The starting point was the criteria contained within the Proposed Regional Policy Statement (Policy
22) as follows.
Policy 22: Identifying indigenous ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity
values – district and regional plans
District  and  regional  plans  shall  identify  indigenous  ecosystems  and  habitats  with  significant
indigenous biodiversity values that meet one or more of the following criteria:
GWRC CRITERIA
Representativeness:  Representativeness: high representativeness values are given to particular ecosystems
and habitats that were once typical and commonplace in a district or in the region, and:
(i)
are no longer commonplace (less than about 30% remaining); or
(ii)
are poorly represented in existing protected areas (less than about 20% legally
protected).
Rarity:
Rarity: the ecosystem or habitat has biological physical features that are scarce or
threatened in a local, regional or national context. This can include individual species, rare
and distinctive biological communities and physical features that are unusual or rare.
Diversity:
Diversity: the ecosystem or habitat has a natural diversity of ecological units, ecosystems,
species and physical features within an area.
Context:
Ecological context of an area: the ecosystem or habitat:
(i)
enhances connectivity or otherwise buffers representative, rare or diverse
indigenous ecosystems and habitats; or
(ii)
provides seasonal or core habitat for protected or threatened indigenous species.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 6

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Given  the  assessment  needed  to  be  carried  out  based  on  a  desktop  analysis,  we  began  by
determining  what  information  could  be  obtained  from  existing  data  sets  for  each  of  the  Policies
broad criteria. After some experimentation, nine criteria were developed that were amenable, with
limitations, to definition based on a desktop analysis of the data sets available. They are:
CRITERIA
Assessment criteria amenable to definition based on desktop analysis of data available.
1. As recorded in previous studies (required some interpretation)
Representativeness
2. LENZ Threat Class (GIS)
3. Rare / Uncommon Habitats recorded (count)
Rarity
4. Rare / Uncommon Flora recorded (count)
5. Rare / Uncommon Fauna recorded (count)
Diversity
6. Number of community types listed or visible (count, required some interpretation)
7. Degree of physical and landscape connectivity to other wetlands and waterbodies, and
Context
buffering from adjacent land uses (from aerial photography & GIS)
8. Records of seasonal migrant, or noted for breeding (count or interpret)
OTHER (Not used for assessment of significance)
Level of Modification  Structures and physical modification (including vegetation clearance) / Artificial
Size
Relevant to considerations of island biogeography (GIS)

Initially it was hoped to eliminate artificial wetlands from the data set, but it became apparent that
most created ponds and wetlands, were formed in existing wetlands, and there was rarely a clear
cut distinction between natural, artificial and modified. After discussion with GWRC, it was agreed
that a criteria for the degree of modification was needed and this final criteria was added.
For each of the eight criteria above a series of descriptions were developed that would allow the
ranking of each site from Very High to Very Low. These criteria were initially developed to allow for
assessment  of  significance  based  solely  on  desktop  data.  They  were  later  refined  through
workshops with GWRC and their external reviewer (Wildland Consultants) to allow for their wider
use  during  field  investigations.  These  updated  criteria  are  provided  here,  though  the  assessment
largely  remains  unchanged.  However,  these  discussions  led  to  the  refinement  of  the  significance
assessment process for determination of site context and buffering.
The following sections describe the assessment criteria in greater detail and provide examples of its
application to individual sites. A complete table of criteria is attached (Appendix 6).

1.5  Data Limitations:
There are a number of limitations on the quality of data which is presented in this report.

No sites in this process have been verified by field survey. For many of the sites almost no
information was given in the source inventory, so any judgement made regarding their value
or  importance  which  is  based  on  aerial  photography  and  GIS  interpretation  must  be
considered incomplete.

Some  inventories  are  considerably  out  of  date.  Some  sites may  have  been  degraded since
their  original  survey,  others  may  no  longer  exist.  Some  sites  appear  to  have  been
“enhanced” through excavation and revegetation.

Most  inventories  have  been  user  driven  and  concentrate  solely  on  a  particular  feature,
species or habitat of perceived importance or describe land of specific tenure such as Scenic
Reserves.  As  a  result,  for  some  sites,  there  is  a  wealth  of  information,  for  others  we  only
know that they have been recorded by a particular author as having value. Some inventories
are themselves prepared in whole or part from earlier inventories and we have endeavoured
to avoid use of these in this analysis.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 7

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
2  Assessment Methodology
2.1  Representativeness
Two  categories  were  considered  for  the  assessment  of  representativeness,  the  threat  class  of  the  land
environment  that  was  intersected  by  each  site,  and  the  representativeness  of  the  site  as  described  by
other studies.

2.1.1  Ecosystems and habitats that are representative of their type (Criteria 1)
In addition to considering how much of an ecological component is still represented in the landscape, an
assessment  of  representativeness  needs  to  consider  how  representative  those  components  are  of  their
original or natural condition.
The following criteria have been developed for this component of the Policy 22 assessment.
Score
1. Representative
Definition: wetlands that are typical and characteristic of those originally present prior to human occupation;
5
or a wetland that is the best example of its type remaining in the region.
Reference Site: Lake Kohangatera
Definition: wetlands that are typical and characteristic of those originally present prior to human occupation,
but where parts of the wetland are not in original condition; or a wetland that is the best example of its type
4
remaining in the ecological district.
Reference Site: Taupo Swamp Complex
Definition: Wetlands that are typical and characteristic examples of the original or current natural diversity
3
of wetland types in the ecological district (but not the best examples remaining).
Reference Site:  Lake Waiorongomai Wetlands
Definition: Wetlands that retain only limited elements that are typical of the natural diversity of an ecological
2
district.
Reference Site: Pylon Swamp
Definition: Wetlands that contain little or no elements that are representative of the natural diversity of an
1
ecological district.
Reference Site: Hutt River Mouth

For the desktop assessment the analysis was based on conclusions drawn from three main datasets, DOC
PNAP  survey  results  (Foxton  1990,  Wairarapa  Plains  2000,  and  Wairarapa  East  2004),  DOC  Ecosites
summaries (GIS), and Council SNA surveys (Porirua 2001, Kapiti Coast 2003).
The scores were an amalgamation of knowledge, as many sites were described in multiple surveys. We
note  that  each  survey  consulted  used  different  methodologies  and  objectives,  and  some  interpretation
was necessary. Also the surveys are sometimes separated by a number of years, with inevitable changes
to some sites which led to discrepancies between studies that required consideration.
As a general guide, if a previous study had rated a site ‘high’ for representativeness and described it as the
best or one of the best remaining of its type, it would score a 5. If a previous study had rated it high for
representativeness and described it as a good or one of the better remaining of its type, it would score a
4.  If  a  previous  study  had  scored  it  high  or  moderate-high,  but  had  identified  major  limitations  to  its
health or integrity it would score a 3 or lower. Similar decisions were made where the early studies had
scored the site moderate or low.
Where  no  earlier  assessments  and  rankings  were  available,  an  assessment  was  made  based  on  what
information was present together with its visual appearance in aerial photography.
Note that most early surveys were not limited to the wetland, but included consideration of all contiguous
indigenous habitats. For some of the sites that were described by these studies the wetland was only a
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 8

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
small component of the wider site. So while the study might rank the wider site as Very High or High, the
wetland component may have been of more limited value. A decision was made on the ranking of these
wetland components based on the descriptions provided.

2.1.2  Ecosystems and habitats that were once typical or commonplace (Criteria 2)
In  order  to  determine  which  of  the  wetlands  identified  within  this  study  lay  within  land  environments
which  have  experienced  excessive  loss,  the  delineated  wetland  extents  were  laid  over  the  LENZ  Threat
Map. Where a site crossed multiple areas of differing threat, the highest threat class was used. The threat
classes and scores used were as follows:
Score
2. LENZ Threat Classes
Definition: Acutely Threatened
5
Reference Site: Muaupoko swamp forest
Definition: Chronically Threatened
4
Reference Site: Tora Coast Wetlands
Definition: At Risk (20-30%)
3
Reference Site: Wainuiomata Waterworks Swamp
Definition: Critically Under protected (> 30%)
2
Reference Site: Opouwae River Swamp
Definition: Under protected or No Threat Category
1
Reference Site: Mt Cone Turf Bog

2.1.3  Example of Assessment
An example of the assessment (including both LENZ and Representativeness) follows:
Wetland ID
1
2
Wetland Name
South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake
Huritini Swamp
Council EcoS
Not on dbase
Foxton Dune lake. One of the few remaining dune lake and
Notes
wetland associations within Foxton Ecological District and is
representative of a formally more common habitat. However,
the site is modified and exotic species are common. Provides
habitat for bamboo spike sedge and kapungawha.  Protected by
DOC Covenant.
Doc EcoS Notes
A very small dune slack with a fringe of
  Open water-wetland
1
Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani with
  reedland on dune lake
Isolepis prolifer. Stock has full access.
  shrubland on dune lake
Reeds have been grazed and there is
  sedgeland on dune lake
considerable pugging down to the
  flaxland on dune lake
water’s edge. This lake is a Wildlife
Refuge but seems to have diminished.
DoC EcoS Notes

  SSWI Mod / WERI 2
2
  Species: Bird: NZ pigeon
  Open water-wetland
  Species: Plant: Eleocharis sphacelata Tall spike rush (WILD)
  Habitat could be improved by fencing and blocking the
drainage outlet to raise the water level (WERI)
  RAP 1: Good waterfowl habitat. Large areas of Eleocharis
sphacelata, now uncommon in the ED (Ravine 1992).
RAP Notes
-
PRIORITY 1:
  Representativeness H Many of these shallow lakes have
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 9

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
been drained so the vegetation communities found here
were probably once common in the ecological district
  Diversity H High density of emergent communities especially
for a relatively small area.
  Special Features M good waterfowl habitat.
  Naturalness M
  Viability H
  Size & Shape M
  Buffering P
AREA (ha)
0.68
26.23
WERISIG
-
2
Doc EcoS Rank
-
H
REP SCORE
1
4
Criteria 1
LENZ THREAT
4
5
Criteria 2

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 10

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
2.2  Rarity
Rarity  was  divided  into  three  categories  for  this  analysis;  habitats,  fauna  and  flora.  Essentially  the
assessments were based on a count of features or species presented in existing records. Sites were scored
as follows.

2.2.1  Rare and distinctive biological communities and physical features that are unusual or rare (Criteria 3)
The following criteria have been developed for this component of the Policy 22 assessment.

Score
3. Communities / Habitats
5
Definition: Large and diverse indigenous communities and habitats that are rare / uncommon.
Reference Site: Allen – Lowes Bush
4
Definition: Several indigenous communities and habitats that are rare / uncommon.
Reference Site: Te Hapua Swamp Complex A
3
Definition: A single rare / uncommon indigenous habitat / community recorded.
Reference Site: El Rancho Wetlands
2
Definition: No rare / uncommon habitat / community recorded (but habitat may support rarity > 3 ha).
Reference Site: Te Hapua Swamp Complex D
1
Definition: No rare / uncommon habitat / community recorded. Site small to very small.
Reference Site: Ladel Bend Wetlands

For the desktop assessment the analysis was based on conclusions drawn from three main datasets, DOC
PNAP survey results (Foxton 1990, Wairarapa Plains 2000, Wairarapa East 2004), DOC Ecosites summaries
(GIS), and Council SNA surveys (Porirua 2001, Kapiti Coast 2003).

2.2.2  Rarity – Rare/Uncommon Flora (Criteria 4)
The following criteria have been developed for this component of the Policy 22 assessment.

Score
4. Flora
5
Definition: Large and diverse populations / communities of threatened / uncommon flora.
Reference Site: Mt Cone Turf Bog
4
Definition: A small number of two or more nationally threatened species, or large numbers of a regionally
threatened species of rare flora.
Reference Site: Waikanae Saltmarsh
3
Definition: A small number of one or more regionally threatened species, or large numbers of locally
threatened species of flora.
Reference Site: Kakaho Saltmarsh
2
Definition: A small number o f one or more locally threatened species of flora.
Reference Site:  Hutt River Mouth
1
Definition: No rare or uncommon flora recorded.
Reference Site: Karori Dam

For  the  desktop  assessment  the  analysis  was  based  on  records  contained  in  three  main  datasets,  DOC
PNAP survey results (Foxton 1990, Wairarapa Plains 2000, Wairarapa East 2004), DOC Ecosites summaries
(GIS), and Council SNA surveys (Porirua 2001, Kapiti Coast 2003).

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 11

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
2.2.3  Rarity – Rare/Uncommon Fauna (Criteria 5)
The following criteria have been developed for this component of the Policy 22 assessment.

Score
5. Fauna
5
Definition: A small number of two or more nationally threatened species, or large numbers of a regionally
threatened species of rare flora.
Reference Site: Wairarapa Moana Wetland Complex
4
Definition: A small number of one or more regionally threatened species, or large numbers of locally
threatened species of flora.
Reference Sites: Lake Pounui
3
Definition: A small number of one or more regionally threatened species, or large numbers of locally
threatened species of flora.
Reference Sites: Taumata Oxbow
2
Definition: A small number of one or more locally threatened species of flora.
Reference Sites: Huritini Swamp
1
Definition: No rare or uncommon flora recorded.
Reference Sites: Sim’s Wetland

For  the  desktop  assessment  the  analysis  was  based  on  records  contained  in  three  main  datasets,  DOC
PNAP survey results (Foxton 1990, Wairarapa Plains 2000, Wairarapa East 2004), DOC Ecosites summaries
(GIS), and Council SNA surveys (Porirua 2001, Kapiti Coast 2003).

2.2.4  Example of Assessment
An example of this assessment (including all four criteria) follows.
Wetland ID
1
2
Wetland Name
South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake
Huritini Swamp
AREA (ha)
0.686587
26.2343
WERI: 2
SUMMARY: Rare and
Vegetation communities found here were probably
Threatened Communities
None recorded
once common in the ecological district. Large areas
and features
of Eleocharis sphacelata, now uncommon in the ED
(Ravine 1992).
COMMUNITY SCORE
1
3
Criteria 3
SUMMARY: Rare and
Threatened Flora
None recorded
Eleocharis sphacelata Tall spike rush.
FLORA SCORE
1
2
Criteria 4
SUMMARY: Rare and
Threatened Fauna
None recorded
NZ pigeon (not threatened)
FAUNA SCORE
1
2
Criteria 5

As described above, where there were no records of rare or threatened species or migrants’ sites were ranked
‘2’ if they were large and likely to have sufficient habitat or ‘1’ if they were small and less likely to have
appropriate habitat.

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 12

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
2.3  Indigenous Diversity
One category was developed for the assessment of diversity. It was based on the diversity of indigenous
communities  or  habitats,  and  was  based entirely  on the  number  of recorded or  identifiable  features  or
communities present. We were unable to consider species diversity due to the lack of site specific species
lists. Sites were scored as follows.

2.3.1  A natural diversity of ecological units, ecosystems, species and physical features (Criteria 6)
The following criteria have been developed for this component of the Policy 22 assessment.
Score
6. Communities
5
Definition: A high diversity of indigenous wetland types and structural classes (greater than 5) and a high
diversity of species of flora and fauna.
Reference Site: Te Hapua Swamp Complex A
4
Definition: All the types of above but of a smaller scale (greater than 5) or a high diversity of species of flora
and fauna within a wetland of lower type diversity.
Reference Site: Huritini Swamp
3
Definition: Moderate diversity of wetland types and structural classes (3 to 5) with a high indigenous
component and moderate species diversity.
Reference Site: Osbournes Swamp
2
Definition: Low diversity of wetland types and structural classes (2 to 3) and low species diversity.
Reference Site: Andrews Pond
1
Definition: Wetland monoculture 1 to 2 wetland types and structural classes, and low species diversity.
Reference Site: Okiwai Lagoon

For the desktop assessment the number of structural classes of plant communities  present at each site
was identified from historical descriptions, or for those sites which have not been previously described,
from  interpretation  of  aerial  photographs.  Structural  classes,  based  on  those  in  Johnson  and  Gerbeaux
(2004), were used as these were generally reported on consistently in historical descriptions.
Three  additions  to  the  structure  classes  were  made  for  this  study  to  recognise  non-vegetated  areas  of
habitat;  i.e.  deep  water,  shallow  water  and  mudflats. Many  descriptions  included  the  size  and  depth  of
the  ponds  or  lakes  found  within  the  wetlands,  and  these  each  provide  different  habitats  for  flora  and
fauna.  Similarly  mudflats,  while  not  having  vegetation  are  still  important  components  of  wetlands
ecology, and were typically included in descriptions.
We also included dry forest as a  type. Dry forest, when present, contributes to the ecological sequence
and habitat diversity of a wetland. Note that while dry forest was included for its contribution to overall
wetland diversity, it was not included in the wetland delineations.
The structural classes used were:

Dry forest buffer

Fernland

Swamp forest

Cushionfield

Treeland

Herbfield

Swamp scrub

Mossfield

Shrubland

Emergent vegetation

Flaxland

Floating vegetation

Tussockland

Submerged vegetation

Reedland

Mudflats

Rushland

Shallow water

Sedgeland

Deep water

Grassland
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 13

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
2.3.2  Example of Assessment
An example of this assessment is as follows:
Wetland ID
1
2
Wetland Name
South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake
Huritini Swamp
Doc EcoS Notes 1
A very small dune lack with a fringe of
Open water-wetland
Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani with Isolepis
Reedland on dune lake
prolifer. Stock has full access. Reeds have been
Shrubland on dune lake
grazed and there is considerable pugging down to
Sedgeland on dune lake
the water’s edge. This lake is a Wildlife Refuge but
seems to have diminished.
Flaxland on dune lake
DoC EcoS Notes 2
-
SSWI Mod / WERI 2
Species: Bird: NZ pigeon
Open water-wetland
Species: Plant: Eleocharis sphacelata Tall spike rush
(WILD)
Habitat could be improved by fencing and blocking
the drainage outlet to raise the water level (WERI)
RAP 1: Good waterfowl habitat. Large areas of
Eleocharis sphacelata, now uncommon in the ED
(Ravine 1992).
GWRC Hydro 2
-
1: Reedland
2: Open water
GWRC Hydro 3
-
1: raupo
2: dune lake
AREA (ha)
0.68
26.2
SUMMARY of
  Open water
  Deep water
Communities
  Reed fringe
  Shallow water
  Pasture
  Reedland
  Sedgeland
  Tussockland
  Shrubland
DIVERSITY SCORE  1
4
Criteria 6

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 14

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
2.4  Context
Two categories were considered for the assessment of context: the degree of connectivity and buffering
of each site, and the use of the site by seasonal migrants or as a core breeding habitat for resident species
of conservation concern. Note that the method and assessment for category 8 was carried out as part of
the Rarity assessment described above.

2.4.1  Enhances physical connectivity, or buffering of representative, rare or diverse indigenous ecosystems or
habitats (Criteria 7)
The following criteria have been developed for this component of the Policy 22 assessment.
SCORE
7.  Buffering & Connectivity
5
Definition: Key part of extensive system of wetlands and waterways that may extend uninterrupted from the
wetland margins to forests, coasts and rivers that is functionally natural, largely intact and well buffered.
Reference Sites: Lake Pounui, Te Harakeke
4
Definition: All the elements of above but of a smaller scale (< 10 ha wetland). Is buffered from adjoining land
uses at least in part, by native vegetation.
Reference Sites: Taupo Swamp
3
Definition: A physical connection (stream, drain, and bush) to other nearby waterbodies but modification
limits ecological service, unlikely to buffer or enhance other sites. Has limited buffering.
Reference Sites: Lake Waiorongomai
2
Definition: No physical connection to other waterbodies or indigenous vegetation but other wetland sites in
close proximity (0.5 – 1 km). Is poorly buffered.
Reference Sites:  Andrews Pond
1
Definition: No physical connection to other waterbodies or indigenous vegetation and very isolated (>1 km).
Has little or no buffering from adjoining land uses.
Reference Sites: Taumata Oxbow

For the desktop assessment the analysis was done from aerial photography and GIS mapping. The data
was divided into three categories which reflected different elements connectivity and buffering and which
could be measured or described by desktop analysis.
For an assessment of buffering the range of land uses that surrounded each site were recorded as simple
percentages into the following types.

% Native forest, bush & scrub

% River, estuary, dune

% Pasture & shrubland

% Pine, willow, exotic

% Urban, residential

% Road & rail
For  landscape  connectivity  the  distance  of  each  site  from  other  wetlands  was  calculated  by  GIS  and
divided into the following:

< 0.5 km to nearest wetland system

0.5 - 1.0 km to nearest wetland system

> 1.0 km to nearest wetland system
For  hydrological  connectivity,  obvious  stream  and  drain  linkages  to  neighbouring  wetlands,  and
connections  to  the  ocean  and  headwaters  was  assessed  using  aerial  photographs  and  topographical
maps.

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 15

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
This data, together with considerations of wetland form and buffering were combined as follows:
Score  Buffering
Landscape Connectivity
Hydrological Connectivity
5
>50% native
3+ other wetlands within 500 m
Unbroken link to sea and headwaters
4
20-50% natives
2-3 other wetlands within 500 m
Unbroken link to sea or headwaters
3
>50% pine
1 other wetland within 500 m
Unbroken link to adjacent water body
2
Limited connectivity to adjacent
>50% pasture
Closest wetland 1 km-500 m away
waterbody
1
>50% urban
Greater than 1 km to closest wetland
No hydrological connection

For Buffering the categories were formed as follows. Any wetland with greater than 50% native or scrub
forest as a margin scored 5. Any wetland with a native forest margin which formed between 20% and 50%
scored a 4. Any wetland with a pine margin greater than 50% scored 3 and so on.
Landscape connectivity assumes that clusters of wetlands are likely to have greater ecological value as a
group than wetlands which are entirely isolated. The ranges of 500 m and 1 km are relatively arbitrary,
but intended to consider issues such as seasonal movements of cryptic wetlands species.
Generally for Hydrological connectivity sites that were headwater wetlands (e.g. Mount Cone), wetlands
in streams, estuarine wetlands, and river mouths scored a 5. Wetlands on a river terrace scored a 2 or 3 as
many  were  oxbow  cut-offs,  or  had  no  obvious  connection  to  the  main  channel.  Wetlands  on  coastal
terraces  typically  scored  a  3  or  4,  typically  having  a  single  connection  to  the  sea  which  was  often
ephemeral.  Dammed  streams  scored  a  2  or  3,  assuming  they  were  still  connected  to  the  headwater
unless, as is the case of the lower Karori Reservoir and swamp forest, they lie between two dams. Dune
wetlands and lagoons on the Kapiti Coast and isolated wetlands on the Wairarapa Plains were assessed
individually,  with  a  focus  on  the  presence  of  farm  drains  or  irrigation  channels,  and  their  proximity  to
major rivers.
The analysis involved a degree of subjectivity. In general, however, sites that had a freshwater connection
to other sites or the sea, had native forest buffering part of their margins and / or were part of a wetland
complex scored more highly. Wetlands that had no surface water links, were entirely surrounded by pine,
pasture or had a major urban influence, and were very isolated scored very low.
The final score for Criteria 7 was the maximum score achieved within any of the three categories above.

2.4.2  Example of Assessment
Wetland ID
1
2
Wetland Name
South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake
Huritini Swamp
SUMMARY: Site Context
Very small lake and wetland / somewhat
Moderate sized dune wetland / part of wetland
isolated (1 wetland < 500 m) / no surface
complex (3+ sites < 550 m) / no surface water
water connections / predominantly in
connections / predominantly in pasture (>50%)
pasture (>50%)
Distance to Nearest (km)
0.31
0.06
Native Bush & Scrub
0%
0%
River Estuary Dune
0%
0%
Pasture & shrubland
100%
40%
Pine & Willow
0%
60%
Urban Residential
0%
0%
Buffering
2
2
Land Connectivity
3
5
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 16

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Hydro Connectivity
1
1
CONNECTIVITY SCORE
3
5
Criteria 7

Note that none of these criteria deal with the issue of subsurface hydrological connectivity, i.e. whether
links  to  groundwater  remain  intact,  modified  or  severed.  This  could  not  be  determined  from  the  data
available and is unlikely to be identified through normal field investigations.

2.4.3  Provides seasonal or core habitat for protected or threatened indigenous species (Criteria 8)
The presence of migrants or of core breeding habitat was assessed using the following criteria
SCORE
8. Seasonal patterns / core habitat for indigenous fauna
5
Definition: Large and diverse seasonal population of migrants and / or a core breeding habitat for more than
three threatened or protected resident species.
Reference Site: Waikanae Saltmarsh
4
Definition: Small numbers of a variety of migrant species, and / or large numbers of a single migrant species
relies on site and/or an important breeding habitat for between 1 and 3 threatened or protected resident
species.
Reference Sites: Waingawa Swamp
3
Definition: Records of breeding by a threatened or protected species, and or a record of an itinerant migrant.
Reference Sites: Simcox Lake
2
Definition: No migrants recorded but the habitat is likely to support their presence.
Reference Sites: Lake Kaitawa
1
Definition: No migrants recorded (and visible habitat unlikely to support)
Reference Sites: Raumati South Peatlands

For  the  desktop  assessment  the  analysis  was  based  on  records  contained  in  three  main  datasets,  DOC
PNAP survey results (Foxton 1990, Wairarapa Plains 2000, Wairarapa East 2004), DOC Ecosites summaries
(GIS), and Council SNA surveys (Porirua 2001, Kapiti Coast 2003).
Note; this criteria was included in the rarity spreadsheet due to the similarity of information used for its
analysis.

2.4.4  Example of Assessment
An example of this assessment (including all four criteria) follows.
Wetland ID
1
2
Wetland Name
South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake
Huritini Swamp
AREA (ha)
0.69
26.2
"SUMMARY: Migrants /
Nil
SSWI M
core breeding habitat
Special Features M
Good waterfowl habitat.
MIGRANT SCORE
1
3
Criteria 8

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 17

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
2.5  Other: Modification
While  the  degree  of  modification  to  a  site  is  implicit  in  the  analysis  carried  out  in  previous  sections,  in
particular  under  representativeness,  the  GWRC_Wet  GIS  dataset  provided  a  description  and  scores  for
modification at 157 of the sites and it was felt this information provided important additional context for
each site. For the remaining 135 sites an assessment was made based on other descriptions of the site,
and study of the aerial photographs.
In the GWRC_Wet dataset scores were provided for four categories: structures, modification, buffers and
grazing  effects.  The  results  for  each  were  averaged  for  the  site  to  give  a  score  which  fit  within  the
following five categories. The assessment criteria were as follows:

2.5.1  Degree of physical modification / fragmentation
Score
Modification
5
Definition: No physical modification apparent. No detrimental inputs.
Reference Site: Mt Cone
4
Definition: Natural wetlands with some structures, clearance but minor in extent and some detrimental inputs.
Reference Sites: Nga Manu
3
Definition: Natural wetlands but with extensive modification or fragmentation to parts or margins and / or sign
detrimental inputs.
Reference Sites: Te Hapua Complex
2
Definition: Natural wetlands almost entirely fragmented or modified by physical works and / or vegetation
removal and / or contaminated inputs.
Reference Sites: Okiwai Lagoons
1
Definition: Entirely artificial (drains, ponds, dams, rushland in pasture)
Reference Sites: Henley Lakes

Capturing  this  information  in  future  surveys  will  also  provide  important  information  to  assist  in  site
management.
This information has not been used in the assessment of significance.

2.5.2  Example of Assessment
An example of this assessment is as follows.
Wetland ID
1
26
Wetland Name
South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake
Te Hapua Swamp Complex A
Artificial 1
Natural dune lake
Although some open water is artificial
Artificial Y-N
N
N
Structures
Surrounding dune system has been cleared and
Northern end of wetland is drained. Artificial
drained for farm land. No structures.
water bodies.
Structure Score
4
3
Modified
Wetland has been reduced considerably in
Groundwater catchment now in pasture
extent.
Modified Score
4
3
Buffer
Grazed paddocks
In some parts landowners are trying to
establish a vegetated buffer.
Buffer Score
4
4
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 18

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Grazed
Grazing to water’s edge. Severe pugging.
Some parts are leased for grazing dry stock
Indigenous wetland vegetation considerably
reduced due to grazing.
Grazed Score
5
3
Calculation From
2
3
GWRC_Wet
MODIFIED SCORE
2
3

The  four  scores  (structures,  modified,  buffer,  grazed)  were  averaged  and  the  result  transferred  to  the
Assessment. Where there was no GWRC score, a score was developed from aerial photographs and other
information available.
[Note that the GWRC scores were in reverse order to those used for this assessment (i.e. 1 equalled very
good, 5 equalled very poor). The scores were therefore reversed (see calculation from GWRC_wet)].
We note that this criterion was included as an indicator of condition, not significance, but it was felt that
given the considerable degree of modification of many sites its inclusion was necessary.

2.6  Other: Size
While  size  is  not  a  factor  included  in  the  proposed  Policy  22  assessment  criteria  it  is  an  acknowledged
contributor to the ecological functioning of ecological systems which forms part of the science of island
biogeography.
Therefore, to provide additional context to each site and to assist in its description the size of the wetland
was calculated by GIS and divided into the following five classes:
Score
Size
5
vl = very large, greater than 20 ha
4
l = large, 10 to 20 ha
3
m = medium, 3 to 10 ha
2
s = small, 1 to 3 ha
1
vs = very small,  less than 1 ha

This information has not been used in the assessment of significance.

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 19

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
3  Results

The eight assessment criteria and the following methods of scoring were developed to place sites with a number
of higher than average ecological values into categories of Very High and High value. Sites that fall within these
two  categories  are  considered  Regionally  Significant  and  sites  of  Very  High  value  are  potentially  nationally
significant.
Where good data is available for each site we are confident this method will score a site correctly. Where sites
have a small or out of date body of knowledge they will tend to score lower. These sites need to be identified
and additional study carried out to confirm their status. This is discussed in section 3.3.

3.1  Scoring
From  the  analysis  described  in  the  previous  sections,  a  summary  table  was  compiled  for  each  site  as
follows:
Representa-
Diver-
Criteria
tiveness
Rarity
sity
Context
Assessment Ranking

y
e

t
ty
or
n
i

vit

c
es
ank
e
n
ti
R
s
t
or

tyi
ce
f S
c
d
re
Z

a
rs
n
ran
o
p

mmu

ra

n

n

g

f S
se
e
o
re
NE at
re
ol
re
au
re
ve
re
re
re
ani
o
p
ID
Wetland Name
R
o
L
re
Co
o
F
o
F
oc
Di
oc
Co
o
Mi
o
ed
m
1.
cS
2.
hT
3.
cS
4.
cS
5.
S
6.
S
7.
cS
8.
cS
M
Su
Pro
149
Lake Kohangapiripiri
5
5
4
4
4
5
5
3
4.50
35
5
235
Mount Cone Turf Bog
5
1
5
5
2
4
5
1
4.50
28
5
99
Horokiri saltmarsh
4
5
4
3
3
5
5
4
4.00
33
4
48
Nga Manu Wetland
5
5
3
3
4
4
5
3
4.00
32
4
Motukaraka saltmarsh
98
4
5
4
3
3
4
5
4
4.00
32
4
/ Ration Point

A  median  score  was  derived  from  all  8  criteria.  A  median was  used  in  preference to  a  mean  or  sum  of
scores to prevent scores being inflated or depressed by a single large or small number (e.g. the LENZ score
of 5 for South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake would have given a mean score of 2, whereas the median is 1.0.
Or alternatively the LENZ Score of 1 for Mt Cone Turf Bog would have depressed its score from a median
of 4.0 to a mean of 3.0).
Five bands of significance were used, and converted to scores of 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1. Ranking of scores was
then done as follows.
MEDIAN BANDS
SCORE
ECOLOGICAL VALUES
4.1 – 5.0
5
Very High
3.1 – 4.0
4
High
2.1 – 3.0
3
Moderate
1.1 – 2.0
2
Lower
0.0 – 1.0
1
Very Low

A median score of 5 is considered Very High, 4 as High, 3 as Moderate, 2 as Low, and 1 as Very Low. The
sites were then sorted, first by their median scores, then their summed counts so that within each band
they were sorted from highest to lowest for additional context.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 20

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
No  attempt  was  made  to  weight  scores, for  instance  giving  representativeness  a  higher  weighting  than
the presence of rare flora. In our view, the simpler and more transparent the system, the better, given the
limitations on the data used.

3.2  Regional Significance
We recommend the following approach:

All sites that score 4 & 5, have been extensively studied, their values well documented and many
have  been  cited  as  being  nationally  or  regionally  significant  by  historic  studies.  In  our  view  no
further investigation is required for these sites to be warrant regional significance status, although
some still require a site visit to confirm their extent.

Sites  that  score  3  generally  have  a  good  body  of  knowledge  and  their  values  have  been
documented to the extent that all can be considered significant at the District Level. However, for
some  sites  historical  surveys  have  been  less  comprehensive  and  with  further  investigation  their
significance may be found to be higher, and some of these sites may be elevated to regional status.
This  is  particularly  so  at  the  upper  end  of  this  band.  Additional  field  study  is  therefore
recommended.

All sites score 2 have been studied and found to have some limited ecological value which makes
them  locally  significant  or;  there  is  no  information about  them  but  the  analysis  of  GIS  and  aerial
data suggests they have some values that would make them significant at the local level. For the
purpose  of  this  project  these  sites  are  clearly  not  regionally  significant  and  no  further  work  is
required.

Sites  that  scored  1  have  either  been  studied  and  do  not  have  wetland  values  that  make  them
significant or, there is little  or no information about them but the analysis  of GIS  and aerial data
suggests they have very low value and are unlikely to be significant. For the purpose of this project
these sites are clearly not regionally significant and no further work is required.
Using the method discussed above has produced the following results:
Rank
Count
Sub totals
TOTAL Sites
Very High
10 sites
37 Sites (Believed to be Nationally or Regionally Significant)
High
27 sites
Significant at District Level, some sites may be Regionally
Moderate
62 Sites
292 Sites
Significant and require further investigation to confirm.
Low
116 sites
Sites Locally significant only.
Very Low
77 sites
These sites may not be significant or may be locally significant.

The full list of sites follows in Appendix 2.

3.3  Additional Study
The tender required the desktop analysis to identify four groups of sites:
1.
Sites which are clearly of regional (or greater) importance and which do not require further field
investigation;
2.
Sites  which  are  clearly  of  regional  (or  greater)  importance  but  which  require  further  definition
through field investigation;
3.
Sites which are potentially of regional significance, but where information is lacking to confirm this
and field investigation is required to confirm significance; and
4.
Sites which are clearly not of regional significance and which do not require further study.

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 21

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
The detail of this analysis is provided in Appendix 3. For each site uncertainty over regional significance
was identified by:
“Y” - Regionally Significant Sites (Score 4 & 5);
“P” - Potentially Regionally Significant Sites (Score 3), and
“U” - Unlikely to be Regionally Significant Sites (Score 1, 2 & 3).
Those sites that were considered to b e potentially regionally significant (P sites) were sites which:

Currently score ‘4’ (high value) but where it is not clear if this ranking relates to wetland or other
values (1 site only, site 225 Bankview);

Currently  score  ‘3’  (moderate  value)  but  for  which  earlier  descriptions  suggest  a  higher  ranking
should be considered; or

Currently score ‘3’ (moderate value), appear in aerial photographs to be large and intact, but are
very  poorly  described,  and  therefore  warrant  additional  consideration  (e.g.  Site  178  Rathkeale
College Bush).
Those sites that were considered to not be regionally significant (U sites) were sites which:

Currently score ‘3’ (moderate) and for which there is no supporting information, either descriptive
(earlier studies) or visual (aerial photographs), that suggest this score should be higher; or

Currently score ‘1’ (very low), or ‘2’ (low).
The requirement for additional fieldwork to delineate sites was identified as:

“Y” - sites where uncertainty remains over wetland extent due to inability to confidently identify
wet / dry boundaries within forest, scrub or grassland.

“N”  -  sites  where  wetland  extent  is  clearly  defined  and  could  be  delineated  with  confidence,  or
where sites are protected and accurate delineation is not required.
The  results  of  this  are  summarised  in  the  following  table.  It  concludes  that  19  sites  that  are  regionally
significant  do  not  require  any  further  work,  and  17  sites  that  are  regionally  significant  require  further
delineation.  Finally  it  identifies  21  sites  that  may  be  regionally  significant  but  require  additional  field
investigation.
RANK
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Regionally Significant (Y)
No further work required (N)
5
14
Regionally Significant  (Y)

Requires field work to confirm delineation (Y)
5
12
Potentially Significant (P)

Requires field work to confirm assessment of
significance (Y)
1
20
Not regionally significant (U)

No further work required (N)
40
116
77

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 22

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
4  Discussion
4.1  Tender Requirements
a)
Accuracy
The tender required development of shape files for each wetland to an accuracy of 1:2,000 (with a margin
of error of ± 10 m). We have typically digitised the shape files at a scale of between 1:1,000 and 1:1,500
and, where the wetland margins can be clearly identified, are comfortable that they are to an accuracy of
± 10 m.
b)
Changes to wetland extent
We  have  reviewed  a  number  of  sites  to  get  some  idea  of  how  this  can  be  achieved.  In  reality  the
significant range of accuracy of delineation between different data sources makes this extremely difficult,
A number of examples are attached (Appendix 1) which shows the considerable variability in delineation
by different agencies. These differences are due to a number of factors:

The scale at which sites have been defined;

The purpose of the earlier delineation;

Whether the mapping was limited to wetlands or included all contiguous indigenous vegetation;

Whether the wetlands were defined off topographical maps or aerial photographs;

The season the aerials were flown (lake level and pasture colour). and

The quality of the aerial photographs;
Other factors that make comparisons between this and other datasets difficult, is whether adjacent sites
are treated singly or in isolation (we have generally combined adjacent sites) and whether the mapped
areas  include  or  exclude  waterbodies  (we  have  excluded  waterbodies  over  1  ha  in  size  and  included
waterbodies smaller than 1 ha).
Despite these issues Appendix 4 provides a comparison of sites between GWRC_Wet and this project, the
two  datasets  most  easily  compared.  There  are  201  sites  in  common  between  these  two  datasets.  A
further 190 sites were added by this project from other datasets, and do not have equivalent sites in the
GWRC_wet dataset.
A  simple  comparison  of  areas  for  those  sites  in  common  (excluding  Wairarapa  Moana  and  Lake  Onoke
which skew the results) gives the results in the following table. This suggests a reduction in wetland area
of 182 ha or 13%. This number needs to be treated with caution for the reasons described above.
BML
GWRC
Difference in
Difference in
Wetlands
Wetlands
Area
Area
(ha)
(ha)
(ha)
(%)
201 Wetlands in common between
GWRC_Wet & this delineation (excluding
1231.7
1413.9
-182.2
- 13%
lakes/lagoons > 1 ha).

The photographs provided for this study were very good, and we suggest the delineation that has been
carried  out  will  provide  a  solid  baseline  for  future  work,  assuming  the  methodology  described  at  the
beginning of this report is followed.
c)
Significance Assessment
The tender required the assessment of significance of the identified wetlands, using methodology agreed
with GWRC, and consistent with Policy 22 of the proposed RPS.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 23

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
We have developed assessment criteria for this project that has been tailored to the need to carry out the
assessment as a desktop exercise. The criteria have followed, where possible Policy 22, but some
deviation from this has been necessary due to the quality of information available.
The methodology has been discussed with GWRC and additional explanation has been provided above as
a result.
d)
Justification for significance rating
While the methodology described above can provide a way of sorting or ranking sites, the final decision
on where the line for significance will be drawn still needs discussion and guidance from GWRC, and for
some sites additional field survey.
Once the cut-off point has been chosen (i.e. uncertain sites within the Moderate band), we are confident
the assessment has been carried out in as transparent a manner as possible so that those sites chosen as
regionally significant clearly meet the criteria developed.
e)
Wetlands requiring field definition:
The results of this analysis are provided in Section 3.3 and Appendix 3.
f)
Land Use
The tender required a record of adjacent land use where information was available. This has been carried
out as part of our assessment of Context.
g)
Other Sites
The tender identified 33 sites for special consideration in this study. They included sites currently listed in
the Wellington Regional Policy Statement and sites listed in the Regional Freshwater Plan, together with
sites known to Council staff. These sites scored as follows:
ID
Name
SCORE
243
Wairarapa Moana Wetlands
5
101
Pauatahanui Inlet Saltmarsh
5
150
Lake Kohangatera
5
39
Te Harakeke Wetland
5
149
Lake Kohangapiripiri
5
99
Horokiri saltmarsh
4
98
Motukaraka saltmarsh / Ration Point
4
88
Taupo Swamp Complex
4
215
Allens - Lowes Bush
4
93
Kakaho Saltmarsh
4
212
Waingawa Swamp
4
155
Turakirae Head
4
82
MacKay's Crossing Swamp
4
66
Muaupoko Swamp Forest
4
141
Orongorongo Swamp
4
213
Fensham & Cobden Bush & Wetland
4
103
Duck Creek Saltmarsh
4
122
Renata-Aston-Elder Ridge Turf
4
3
Lake Waiorongomai Wetlands
3
79
Queen Elizabeth Park Bush and Wetlands
3
125
Maymorn Ridge
3
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 24

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
221
Carters Bush / Pike Lagoon
3
236
Omega Bogs and Tarns
3
14
Waitohu River Mouth Saltmarsh
3
224
Kourarau Dam
3
140
Skull Gully Wetland
2
139
Mohaka Street Wetland
2
136
Hutt Rivermouth
2
"Motuwaireka Rivermouth & Shelton Wetland; Orui Wetland (Riversdale
199
2
Lagoon and Ureti Wetland)"
246
Pukio Oxbow
2
114
Opau Stream Wetland A
2
86
Swampy Gully, Battle Hill
1
113
Opau Stream Wetland B
1

4.2  Other Matters
Numbering and Sorting
Each wetland that has been delineated by this process has been sorted and numbered for easy reference.
They have been sorted first by District Council, then by northing and easting to produce the site ID used
throughout this document.
Coastal and Marine Terrace and Dune Wetlands
There are a large number of sites on the south and east coast which include identification of wetlands in
their  descriptions.  However,  the  significance  assessments  for  these  sites  provided  by  other  studies  are
often related more to dry land habitat such as dune, dry scrub, beach, rock stacks and reefs, rather than
the  wetland  portions  of  the  sites.  Any  sites  on  these  coastal  terraces,  which  lie  within  the  regionally
significant band, will need to be visited to confirm their values.
Swamp Forest
The  accuracy  of  wetland  delineation  is  also  doubtful  where  a  wetland  merges into  forest.  Any  forested
sites  that  fall  within  the  regionally  significant  band,  will  need  to  be  visited  to  define  the  boundary  of
swamp, semi-swamp, and dry forest and confirm their extent and ecological value.
In addition, we note that a number of small forest fragments which are included in some of the datasets
may  no  longer  be  true  swamp  forest,  in  particular  those  on  the  Wairarapa  Plains  where  drainage
surrounding these sites is evident.
Te Hapua
Historically Te Hapua wetland has been divided into four separate clusters. After discussion with GWRC
these clusters were re-defined based on clear connectivity, or lack of, and on the degree of modification,
with several groups largely created and two largely intact. There are now six separate groups, two which
lie  some  distance  to  the east  and  probably  should not be  considered  as  part  of  the  Te Hapua  complex.
These revised clusters should be confirmed.
Lake Wairarapa
After discussion with GWRC it was agreed that the assessment for this waterbody and wetland complex
should  combine  all  areas  that  were  contiguous  with  the  lake  or  directly  connected.  This  was  because
many  of  the  normally  discrete  wetlands  referred  to  in  documents  have  been  separated  based  on  land
ownership,  not  ecological  distinctiveness.  The  assessment  for  this  wetland  therefore  includes  the
following named wetlands.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 25

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
GWRC_Wet
Doc_EcoSites
Doc Conservation Units
163: Lake Domain
129: Ruamahanga Floodway Wetland
S27001 Lake Wairarapa Wetland
167: Simmonds Lagoon
13: Floodway Lake
Conservation Area
169: Big Haywoods
1465: Allsops Bay Shrubland
S27001 Lake Wairarapa Wetland
170: Little Haywards
1474: Mangatete Stream
Conservation Area
175: JK Donald Reserve
149: Turners Lagoon
S27002 Matthews & Boggy Pond
Wildlife Reserve
180: Unsurveyed site 3
158: Wairio Ponds
S27004 Allsops Bay Wildlife Reserve
183: Makakiki Backwater
2340: Lake Wairarapa Wetland
S27008 Wairarapa Lake Shore Scenic
186: Pierce Block
Stewardship Extension-Part"
Reserve
189: Dune Block
34: Donalds/Haywoods Wetland
S27047 Turner Wildlife Reserve
193: Simms Cabbage Tree Swamp
4: Bartons Lagoon
S27047 Turner Wildlife Reserve
194: Boggy Pond
518: Tauherenikau Delta
S27048 Turners Lagoon Wildlife
197: Mathews Lagoon
58: Lake Wairarapa
Reserve
204: Waiorongamai DoC Covenant
58: Lake Wairarapa
S27050 Roto Marginal Strip
213: Papatahi Neville Davies
581: Western Lake Road Bush
S27058 Owhanga Landing Reserve
214: Davies Swamp
581: Western Lake Road Bush
268: Barrys puddle
6: Boggy Pond
63: Makakahi Backwater
71: Matthews Lagoon
9: Domain Lagoon

One  wetland  that  lay  some  distance  from  the  main  Wairarapa-Moana  system,  but  which  could  be
included within it is “Carters Bush / Pikes Lagoon”. This site lies in farmland, 550 m to the north of Lake
Wairarapa.
Pauatahanui Inlet
After discussion with GWRC it was agreed not to combine the Pauatahanui Inlet wetlands, on the basis
that  they  are  isolated  by  urban  development  including  the  imposition  of  SH56  and  Grays  Road  on  the
estuary  margins.    The  assessment  for  this  wetland  therefore  treats  each  of  the  following  wetlands  as
separate sites.

Horokiri Raupo Swamp

Kakaho Saltmarsh

Camborne Scarp wetland

Motukaraka saltmarsh / Ration Point

Horokiri saltmarsh

Pauatahanui Inlet - Tidal Flats

Pauatahanui Inlet Saltmarsh

Duck Creek Saltmarsh
Lakes
There  were  23  wetlands  that  had  waterbodies  over  1  ha  in  size.  These  waterbodies  were  separately
delineated  and  their  area  was  deducted  from  the  area  of  the  surrounding  wetland.  These  waterbodies
and their sizes were:

LAKE NAME
AREA (ha)
Lake Wairarapa - Open Water
7092.49
Lake Onoke Open Water
709.83
Lake Pounui - Open Water
44.83
Lake Kohangatera - Open Water
16.75
Lake Kaitawa - Open Water
15.52
Lake Kohangapiripiri - Open Water
10.79
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 26

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Lake Kopureherehere - Open Water
7.06
Lake Waiorongomai - Open Water
5.56
O Te Pua Lagoon - Open Water
5.24
Kourarau Dam - Open Water
4.38
Lake Nganoke - Open Water
4.14
Makara Estuary - Open Water
3.26
Waimanu Lagoons - Open Water
2.86
Sutherland Wetland- Open Water
2.76
Lower Karori Reservoir - Open Water
2.63
Ruamahanga Loop - Open Water
2.34
Hidden Lakes - Open Water
1.95
Otaki River Mouth Lagoon - Open Water
1.88
Lake Hurutini - Open Water
1.66
Lake Kiriwhakapapa - Open Water
1.53
Campbells Dam - Open Water
1.40
Ratanui Swamp - Open Water
1.16
Upper Karori Reservoir - Open Water
1.12
Lake Rotopotakataka - Open Water
0.99
Waimeha Lagoon - Open Water
0.99

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 27

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
5  Conclusions


This  study  has  considered  4,954  records  from  17  national,  regional  or  district  data  sets  and  extracted
those that relate to wetlands within the Wellington Region.

From  these  data  sets  a  total  of  292  wetlands  have  been  identified  and  their  boundaries  digitised.  The
methodology for this has been described to enable future repeatability.

For each of these wetlands the information contained within each of the datasets has been combined and
presented in a series of spreadsheets to allow for analysis of each sites values.

In addition a range of information on the size, connectivity, diversity, buffering, and isolation of each site
has been derived from GIS analysis and interpretation of high resolution aerial photography.

A  set  of  assessment  criteria  have  been  developed,  based  on  Policy  22  of  the  Proposed  Regional  Policy
Statement,  but  modified  to  enable  analysis  of  these  sites  based  solely  on  a  desktop  study  with  the
obvious limitations that creates. The methodology for applying these criteria has been described in detail
to enable future repeatability.

A number of problems with delineation and assessment have been identified and described.

Each of the sites has been assessed and given a score, then sorted into ranks from Very High to Very Low.
It  is  considered  any  site  with  the  VH  and  H  ranks  is  significant  at  a  national  or  regional  level.  All  sites
within the M band are considered locally significant and may be significant at the regional level although
for a number of sites this needs to be confirmed. Sites within the L band are significant, but are likely to
be so at the District Level. Sites within the VL band may not be significant.

The  results  suggest  that  36  sites  are  regionally  significant,  a  further  21  sites  are  potentially  regionally
significant, but some additional consideration is required to confirm this. 158 sites are of local value, and
77 sites have very low values and are likely to not be significant.

Finally  this  report  has  identified  those  wetlands  requiring  further  study.  In  total  17  wetlands  that  are
regionally significant require field survey to confirm their extent in areas where aerial photography was
unclear.  A  further  21  wetlands  require  field  survey  to  confirm  whether  they  are  regionally  or  locally
significant.

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 28

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
APPENDIX 1:
Examples of differing delineations from current databases
All Databases combined: Blue is GWRC_Hydro; Red is GWRC_wet; Ochre is GWRC_extent; Green solid is
DoC_Ecosite; Green dashed is DoC RAP; Brown is KCDC_Ecosite; Yellow is this project delineation.

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 29

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance

.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 30

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance

.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 31

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
APPENDIX 2:
Wetland Sites Ranking
Results of Desktop Study Ranking (5=Very High to 1=Very Low)

Significance Assessment
Ranking

ero
s

e

y
y
r
t
ti
Scf
o
nt
i
y
vit
  t
o
se

un

t
c
Scf
e

e

e
si
e
e
an
E
r
at
an
e
m
e r
a
e r
na
r
r
r
e r
r
e r
di
o
R
ID
Wetland Name
pr
m
r
o
e
o
nn
g
e
o
o
o
o
o
c
vi
c
o
o
i
o
e
O
R
cS
LENZ
hrT
C
cS
lF cS
auF S
D
S
C
cS
M
cS
M
umS
CS
Wetland sites considered nationally or regionally significant)
243
Wairarapa Moana Wetlands
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5.00
39
5
56
Waikanae Saltmarsh
5
5
4
4
5
5
5
5
5.00
38
5
26
Te Hapua Swamp Complex A
5
5
4
4
5
5
5
4
5.00
37
5
101
Pauatahanui Inlet Saltmarsh
5
5
4
3
5
5
5
5
5.00
37
5
150
Lake Kohangatera
5
5
5
3
4
5
5
4
5.00
36
5
261
Lake Pounui
5
5
5
3
4
5
5
4
5.00
36
5
39
Te Harakeke Wetland
5
5
3
3
5
5
5
4
5.00
35
5
149
Lake Kohangapiripiri
5
5
4
4
4
5
5
3
4.50
35
5
100
Pauatahanui Inlet - Tidal Flats
5
5
4
2
5
3
5
5
5.00
34
5
235
Mount Cone Turf Bog
5
1
5
5
2
4
5
1
4.50
28
5
99
Horokiri saltmarsh
4
5
4
3
3
5
5
4
4.00
33
4
48
Nga Manu Wetland
5
5
3
3
4
4
5
3
4.00
32
4
98
Motukaraka saltmarsh / Ration Point
4
5
4
3
3
4
5
4
4.00
32
4
265
Lake Onoke (incl Pounui Lagoon &
4
5
3
3
4
5
5
3
4.00
32
4
Kiriwai Lagoon)
7
Lake Kopureherehere
5
5
4
3
3
4
5
2
4.00
31
4
88
Taupo Swamp Complex
4
5
4
4
4
4
5
1
4.00
31
4
215
Allens - Lowes Bush
5
5
5
3
3
4
4
2
4.00
31
4
93
Kakaho Saltmarsh
4
5
4
3
3
4
5
2
4.00
30
4
49
Kapiti Island Swamp Forest
4
5
4
3
3
4
5
1
4.00
29
4
212
Waingawa Swamp
5
5
2
4
4
3
2
4
4.00
29
4
123
Martin River Wetland
4
4
2
4
3
4
5
2
4.00
28
4
225
Bankview
5
4
4
4
1
3
5
1
4.00
27
4
155
Turakirae Head
3
5
4
3
4
3
5
3
3.50
30
4
176
Whakatiki River Mouth
3
5
4
3
3
4
5
3
3.50
30
4
2
Huritini Swamp
5
5
3
2
2
4
5
3
3.50
29
4
82
MacKay's Crossing Swamp
3
5
3
4
4
3
4
3
3.50
29
4
27
Te Hapua Swamp Complex D
4
5
2
2
3
4
5
3
3.50
28
4
66
Muaupoko Swamp Forest
4
5
4
2
3
3
5
2
3.50
28
4
76
Raumati South Peatlands B
4
5
3
3
2
4
5
2
3.50
28
4
141
Orongorongo Swamp
5
5
2
2
2
5
5
2
3.50
28
4
10
Lake Kaitawa & Keelings Bush
4
5
3
2
3
4
4
2
3.50
27
4
21
Otaki River Mouth Lagoon &
2
5
2
2
4
3
5
4
3.50
27
4
Rangiruru Wetland
213
Fensham & Cobden Bush & Wetland
4
5
4
3
3
2
4
2
3.50
27
4
20
Haruatai Park Forest
4
5
4
2
2
3
4
2
3.50
26
4
102
Te Onepoto Wetland
4
5
3
3
1
4
5
1
3.50
26
4
103
Duck Creek Saltmarsh
4
5
4
1
2
3
5
2
3.50
26
4
122
Renata-Aston-Elder Ridge Turf
5
1
4
4
2
3
5
2
3.50
26
4
Wetland sites that are significant at a District scale or may elevate to regional significant with additional investigationn
16
O te Pua (Pukehou / Pritchard's
4
5
3
3
3
3
4
3
3.00
28
3
Swamp)
31
Okupe Lagoon
5
5
3
2
3
3
4
3
3.00
28
3
196
Orui A Whareama River Mouth
5
5
3
3
2
3
5
2
3.00
28
3
3
Lake Waiorongomai Wetlands
3
5
3
2
4
3
4
3
3.00
27
3
112
Makara Rvr Mth
3
5
2
2
3
3
5
4
3.00
27
3
15
Ngatotara Lagoon
3
5
3
2
3
3
4
3
3.00
26
3
23
Otaki River Mouth South
3
5
2
2
4
2
5
3
3.00
26
3
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 32

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Significance Assessment
Ranking

ero
s

e

y
y
r
t
ti
Scf
o
nt
i
y
vit
  t
o
se

un

t
c
Scf
e

e

e
si
e
e
an
E
r
at
an
e
m
e r
a
e r
na
r
r
r
e r
r
e r
di
o
R
ID
Wetland Name
pr
m
r
o
e
o
nn
g
e
o
o
o
o
o
c
vi
c
o
o
i
o
e
O
R
cS
LENZ
hrT
C
cS
lF cS
auF S
D
S
C
cS
M
cS
M
umS
CS
50
Waimeha Lagoon - Victor Weggery
3
5
3
2
4
3
3
3
3.00
26
3
Reserve
54
El Rancho Wetlands
3
5
3
3
2
3
5
2
3.00
26
3
191
Otahoua Swamp
5
5
3
3
2
2
4
2
3.00
26
3
239
Turners Lagoon
3
5
2
2
3
4
5
2
3.00
26
3
79
Queen Elizabeth Park Bush and
3
5
3
4
2
3
3
2
3.00
25
3
Wetlands
125
Maymorn Ridge
5
1
4
3
2
3
5
2
3.00
25
3
221
Carters Bush / Pike Lagoon
3
5
2
4
2
3
4
2
3.00
25
3
234
Honeycomb Rock Terrace
3
5
3
4
3
2
2
3
3.00
25
3
236
Omega Bogs and Tarns
5
1
4
2
2
4
5
2
3.00
25
3
267
Whangaimoana Stream Mouth
3
5
3
3
2
2
5
2
3.00
25
3
75
Raumati South Peatlands A
3
5
3
3
1
3
5
1
3.00
24
3
173
Hidden Lakes
3
5
2
1
3
4
5
1
3.00
24
3
269
Tuturumuri Swamp A
3
5
2
3
2
3
4
2
3.00
24
3
240
Ruamahanga Loop
3
5
2
2
3
3
2
3
3.00
23
3
283
Tora Coast (d)
2
4
3
3
2
3
4
2
3.00
23
3
12
Waimanguru Lagoon (Forest Lake)
1
5
3
2
3
3
3
2
3.00
22
3
85
Muri Road Wetland
3
5
3
1
1
3
5
1
3.00
22
3
263
Lake Nganoke
3
5
3
1
4
2
3
1
3.00
22
3
247
Oporua Bush A
3
5
3
3
1
2
3
1
3.00
21
3
186
Solway Remnant A
3
5
3
3
1
1
3
1
3.00
20
3
124
Whakatikei Headwater Swamp
3
5
2
2
2
4
5
2
2.50
25
3
29
Te Hapua Wetland Complex C
3
5
2
2
2
3
5
2
2.50
24
3
30
Te Hapua Wetland Complex B
3
5
3
2
2
2
5
2
2.50
24
3
89
Plimmerton Swamp East
3
5
2
2
2
3
5
2
2.50
24
3
184
Unknown QE2
3
5
2
2
2
3
5
2
2.50
24
3
195
Whareama Rivermouth
2
5
2
2
4
1
5
3
2.50
24
3
206
Patanui Stream Mouth
2
5
2
2
3
2
5
3
2.50
24
3
223
Taumata Oxbow
4
5
2
2
3
4
2
2
2.50
24
3
6
Pylon Swamp
2
5
3
2
3
2
5
1
2.50
23
3
14
Waitohu River Mouth Saltmarsh
1
5
2
2
3
2
5
3
2.50
23
3
51
Osbourne's Swamp
2
5
3
2
2
3
4
2
2.50
23
3
60
Tini Bush
5
5
3
1
1
2
5
1
2.50
23
3
80
Queen Elizabeth Park Railway
2
5
2
3
2
2
4
3
2.50
23
3
Wetlands
126
Whakarikei Wetland
3
5
2
2
2
4
3
2
2.50
23
3
167
Mataikona River Mouth Swamp
2
5
2
2
3
1
5
3
2.50
23
3
178
Rathkeale College Bush
4
5
2
3
2
3
2
2
2.50
23
3
227
Kaiwhata River Oxbow
3
5
2
2
3
2
4
2
2.50
23
3
228
Kaiwhata River Mouth
1
5
2
2
4
1
5
3
2.50
23
3
266
Wharekauhau Swamp
3
4
2
2
2
3
5
2
2.50
23
3
289
Opouawe Rivermouth
1
5
2
2
3
1
5
4
2.50
23
3
4
Simcox Lake
1
5
2
2
3
1
5
3
2.50
22
3
34
Pekapeka Road Swamp
3
5
2
2
3
3
2
2
2.50
22
3
144
Wainuiomata Waterworks Swamp
3
3
2
2
2
3
5
2
2.50
22
3
Upper
145
Wainuiomata Waterworks Swamp
3
3
2
2
2
3
5
2
2.50
22
3
Lower
248
Oporua Bush B, C, D
3
5
2
3
2
2
3
2
2.50
22
3
290
White Rock Beach A
2
5
2
4
3
1
2
3
2.50
22
3
117
Karori Dam
2
1
2
1
4
3
5
3
2.50
21
3
154
Wainuiomata River Mouth
1
5
2
3
1
1
5
3
2.50
21
3
220
Brazendale
3
5
1
1
3
2
5
1
2.50
21
3
222
Taumata Stream
1
5
2
1
3
1
5
3
2.50
21
3
224
Kourarau Dam
1
5
2
2
3
3
2
3
2.50
21
3
64
Ratanui Swamp
2
5
1
1
3
2
3
3
2.50
20
3
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 33

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Significance Assessment
Ranking

ero
s

e

y
y
r
t
ti
Scf
o
nt
i
y
vit
  t
o
se

un

t
c
Scf
e

e

e
si
e
e
an
E
r
at
an
e
m
e r
a
e r
na
r
r
r
e r
r
e r
di
o
R
ID
Wetland Name
pr
m
r
o
e
o
nn
g
e
o
o
o
o
o
c
vi
c
o
o
i
o
e
O
R
cS
LENZ
hrT
C
cS
lF cS
auF S
D
S
C
cS
M
cS
M
umS
CS
193
Ruamahanga River Terrace
4
5
1
3
1
2
3
1
2.50
20
3
203
Ruakaka Pond
3
5
2
1
3
3
2
1
2.50
20
3
159
Manawa-David Dalziel
1
4
2
2
3
3
3
1
2.50
19
3
Wetlands of limited value that may be significant at a District level.
25
Rahui Road Bush C / Croads Bush
5
5
4
2
2
2
2
2
2.00
24
2
Gully
107
Porirua Harbour (Onepoto Arm) -
2
5
2
2
2
3
5
2
2.00
23
2
Tidal Flats
177
Matahiwi Bush II
3
5
2
2
2
2
5
2
2.00
23
2
69
Kapiti Airfield Wetland A
2
5
2
3
2
2
4
2
2.00
22
2
133
Blue Mountain Bush Swamp Forest
4
5
2
2
3
2
2
2
2.00
22
2
140
Skull Gully Wetland
4
3
2
2
2
2
5
2
2.00
22
2
170
Trimble Trust
3
4
2
2
2
2
5
2
2.00
22
2
171
Gary Daniells
2
5
2
2
2
2
5
2
2.00
22
2
174
Okau Stream Mouth
3
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
22
2
259
Unknown 26
3
5
2
2
2
2
4
2
2.00
22
2
5
Simcox Swamp
2
5
2
2
2
2
5
1
2.00
21
2
8
Wairongomai Road Manuka Wetland
2
5
2
2
2
3
4
1
2.00
21
2
32
Te Hapua Swamp Complex F
2
5
2
2
2
3
3
2
2.00
21
2
33
Kowhai Stream Mouth (Hadfields)
3
4
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
41
Waimeha Stream Mouth
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
81
Wainui Stream Mouth
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
128
Stock Car wetland
3
5
2
2
2
1
5
1
2.00
21
2
139
Mohaka Street Wetland
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
172
Kiriwhakapapa Lagoon
3
5
2
2
2
3
2
2
2.00
21
2
182
"Humpy" Stream Mouth
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
189
Otahome Stream Mouth
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
198
Orui C & D
3
5
2
2
2
3
2
2
2.00
21
2
208
Waikaraka Stream Mouth
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
210
Homewood Dam
2
5
2
2
3
2
3
2
2.00
21
2
242
Rototawai Lake
2
5
3
2
3
2
2
2
2.00
21
2
256
Unknown (not Battery Pond)
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
272
Rerewhakaaitu Rivermouth
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
286
Otekaha Stream mouth, Cape Palliser
2
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
21
2
287
Tora Coast (b)
4
4
2
2
2
1
4
2
2.00
21
2
292
White Rock Beach B
2
4
2
4
2
2
2
3
2.00
21
2
24
Mangaone Stream Mouth
2
4
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
20
2
28
Te Hapua Swamp Complex E
2
5
2
2
2
2
3
2
2.00
20
2
77
Poplar Ave Wetland
2
5
2
2
2
2
3
2
2.00
20
2
78
Whareroa Estuary
2
4
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
20
2
136
Hutt Rivermouth
1
5
2
2
3
1
5
1
2.00
20
2
142
Gracefield Scrub / Waiau Wetland
2
5
2
2
2
1
4
2
2.00
20
2
153
Unsurveyed site 1
2
5
4
1
2
1
4
1
2.00
20
2
188
Henley Lakes A
1
5
2
2
2
2
4
2
2.00
20
2
197
Whareama Dune System Wetland
3
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.00
20
2
199
"Motuwaireka Rivermouth & Shelton
2
5
2
1
3
1
5
1
2.00
20
2
Wetland
200
Riversdale South Dunes
2
5
2
2
2
2
3
2
2.00
20
2
211
Egan (a)
1
5
2
2
3
2
2
3
2.00
20
2
214
Clareville wetland
2
5
2
2
2
2
3
2
2.00
20
2
218
Main Road Swamp (Foreman)
2
5
2
2
2
2
3
2
2.00
20
2
253
Waituna Western Bush
3
5
1
1
1
3
5
1
2.00
20
2
274
Oterei River Mouth
1
5
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
20
2
275
Makotukutuku Stream mouth
2
4
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
20
2
(Washpool) Cape Palliser
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 34

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Significance Assessment
Ranking

ero
s

e

y
y
r
t
ti
Scf
o
nt
i
y
vit
  t
o
se

un

t
c
Scf
e

e

e
si
e
e
an
E
r
at
an
e
m
e r
a
e r
na
r
r
r
e r
r
e r
di
o
R
ID
Wetland Name
pr
m
r
o
e
o
nn
g
e
o
o
o
o
o
c
vi
c
o
o
i
o
e
O
R
cS
LENZ
hrT
C
cS
lF cS
auF S
D
S
C
cS
M
cS
M
umS
CS
276
Castle River
3
2
2
2
2
2
5
2
2.00
20
2
279
Awheaiti Stream Mouth
2
4
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
20
2
282
Pararaki Stream mouth, Cape Palliser
2
4
2
2
2
1
5
2
2.00
20
2
45
Ngarara Road Wetland D
1
5
1
3
3
1
4
1
2.00
19
2
73
Wharemauku Stream Mouth
2
5
1
1
2
1
5
2
2.00
19
2
162
Kakaumu Dams North
1
5
2
2
2
3
3
1
2.00
19
2
166
Cambell / Connell Dam
1
5
2
2
2
2
2
3
2.00
19
2
226
Wainuioru River Bush
1
5
1
2
2
2
5
1
2.00
19
2
229
Caledonia Wetland
2
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.00
19
2
13
Lake Rotopotakataka (Forest Lake)
2
1
2
1
3
3
4
2
2.00
18
2
19
Otaki Stewardship area wetland
2
4
2
2
2
1
4
1
2.00
18
2
37
Unsurveyed Site 5
1
5
2
2
2
1
3
2
2.00
18
2
118
Karori Reservoir Swamp Forest
3
3
3
1
1
1
5
1
2.00
18
2
146
Unsurveyed wetland
3
3
1
1
3
1
5
1
2.00
18
2
157
Waipaua Stream Shrubland
1
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.00
18
2
161
Owhanga Coast (Chimnes)
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2.00
18
2
163
Manuka flats
1
4
2
2
2
3
3
1
2.00
18
2
164
Kakaumu Dam West
1
5
2
2
3
1
3
1
2.00
18
2
165
Kakaumu Dam East
1
5
2
2
3
1
3
1
2.00
18
2
192
Ruamahunga Oxbow
3
5
1
1
1
3
3
1
2.00
18
2
202
Uriti Pont Lagoon
1
5
2
2
2
1
3
2
2.00
18
2
216
Carterton Golf Course
1
5
2
2
2
1
3
2
2.00
18
2
233
Glenburn Station
2
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.00
18
2
244
Mahaki Swamp
3
5
2
2
1
2
2
1
2.00
18
2
246
Pukio Oxbow
2
5
2
2
2
1
2
2
2.00
18
2
258
Battery Pond
2
3
2
1
2
3
3
2
2.00
18
2
284
Tora Coast (c)
2
4
3
2
1
2
3
1
2.00
18
2
109
Okiwai Lagoon and Wetlands
1
5
2
1
2
1
3
2
2.00
17
2
131
Mangaroa Swamp South
2
4
2
2
2
1
2
2
2.00
17
2
219
Gretel Dick Wetland
1
5
2
2
2
1
2
2
2.00
17
2
238
Elm Grove (Kempton)
3
5
2
1
1
2
2
1
2.00
17
2
251
Te Hopai Lagoon
1
5
2
2
2
1
2
2
2.00
17
2
255
Waihora Lagoon
3
4
1
1
1
2
2
3
2.00
17
2
288
Tora Coast (a)
2
4
2
2
2
1
2
2
2.00
17
2
72
Andrews Pond
2
5
2
1
1
2
2
1
2.00
16
2
179
Titoki Dams Wetland
1
4
2
1
3
1
2
2
2.00
16
2
231
Watipu Farm Dam
2
4
2
1
1
3
2
1
2.00
16
2
291
Te Kaukau Point Seal Haulout
2
2
3
2
2
1
2
2
2.00
16
2
293
Punaruku Lagoon
2
4
1
3
1
2
2
1
2.00
16
2
42
Ngarara Bush
4
5
2
1
1
1
5
1
1.50
20
2
96
Mana Island
2
5
1
1
1
3
5
1
1.50
19
2
249
Moeraki
2
5
1
1
1
3
5
1
1.50
19
2
59
Turf Farm Dune Forest
2
5
1
4
1
1
3
1
1.50
18
2
63
Otaihanga Landfill South
2
5
1
1
1
3
4
1
1.50
18
2
74
Kaitawa Reserve Swamp Forest
3
5
1
1
1
2
4
1
1.50
18
2
87
Battle Hill Ponds
2
5
1
1
1
3
4
1
1.50
18
2
135
Korokoro Stream Mouth
1
5
1
1
2
1
5
2
1.50
18
2
187
Solway Remnants B
3
5
1
1
1
2
4
1
1.50
18
2
270
Tuturumuri Swamp B
3
5
1
1
1
2
4
1
1.50
18
2
53
Waimanu Lagoons
2
5
3
1
1
1
3
1
1.50
17
2
84
Bells Bush
2
4
1
1
1
2
5
1
1.50
17
2
106
Romesdale Lagoon
2
5
1
1
1
3
3
1
1.50
17
2
114
Opau Stream Wetland A
3
2
1
1
1
3
5
1
1.50
17
2
119
Karori Reservoir
1
3
2
1
3
1
5
1
1.50
17
2
217
Allens Bush
2
5
1
1
1
3
3
1
1.50
17
2
262
Kiriwai farm
2
4
1
1
1
2
5
1
1.50
17
2
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 35

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
Significance Assessment
Ranking

ero
s

e

y
y
r
t
ti
Scf
o
nt
i
y
vit
  t
o
se

un

t
c
Scf
e

e

e
si
e
e
an
E
r
at
an
e
m
e r
a
e r
na
r
r
r
e r
r
e r
di
o
R
ID
Wetland Name
pr
m
r
o
e
o
nn
g
e
o
o
o
o
o
c
vi
c
o
o
i
o
e
O
R
cS
LENZ
hrT
C
cS
lF cS
auF S
D
S
C
cS
M
cS
M
umS
CS
22
269-281 SH1 Otaki
2
5
1
1
1
2
3
1
1.50
16
2
108
Aotea Lagoon
1
5
2
2
1
1
3
1
1.50
16
2
156
Owahanga Tussockland
2
5
1
3
1
1
2
1
1.50
16
2
252
Donalds Wetland
2
5
1
1
1
3
2
1
1.50
16
2
134
Johnson's Road Wetland
2
5
1
1
1
2
2
1
1.50
15
2
138
Waiwhetu Rivermouth
1
1
2
1
2
1
5
2
1.50
15
2
180
D Cook Wetland
1
5
2
2
1
1
2
1
1.50
15
2
285
Kawakawa Dune Hollow
2
4
1
1
1
2
3
1
1.50
15
2
160
Bushgate
2
4
1
1
1
2
2
1
1.50
14
2
232
Waimoana Wetland
2
4
1
1
1
2
2
1
1.50
14
2
277
Opouawe River Swamp B
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1.50
12
2
280
Kaiwaka Road A
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1.50
12
2
281
Kaiwaka Road B
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1.50
12
2
Wetlands that may not be significant or insufficient information
92
Horokiri Raupo Swamp
3
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
18
1
205
Wairongo Stream Wetland
1
5
3
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
18
1
18
Otaki Porirua Trust Board Wetland
1
5
1
1
1
2
5
1
1.00
17
1
65
Reikorangi Road Bush D
2
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
17
1
86
Swampy Gully, Battle Hill
2
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
17
1
97
Camborne Scarp wetland
2
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
17
1
110
Cannons Creek Lakes
1
5
1
1
1
2
5
1
1.00
17
1
111
Hawkins Gully Wetland
2
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
17
1
121
Sinclair Head
5
5
1
1
1
1
2
1
1.00
17
1
129
Wi Tako Ghania wetland
1
5
2
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
17
1
132
Mangaroa Swamp
3
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
17
1
181
Ngakaukau Stream Mouth
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
2
1.00
17
1
268
Pahaoa
2
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
17
1
271
Tuturumuri Swamp C
1
5
1
1
1
3
4
1
1.00
17
1
46
Unknown
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
58
Lion Downs Bush
3
5
1
1
1
1
3
1
1.00
16
1
61
Otaihanga Landfill North
2
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
16
1
62
Otaihanga Landfill Central
2
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
16
1
70
Kapiti Road Wetland A
1
5
1
1
3
1
3
1
1.00
16
1
90
The Glenn Wetland
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
91
West Horokiri Wetland
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
95
Motukaraka West Wetland
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
130
Ladel Bend Wetland
3
3
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
147
Sugarloaf Bush
3
3
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
175
Davidson Wetland
2
4
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
185
Rare Animal Farm
1
5
1
1
3
1
3
1
1.00
16
1
201
Uriti Point
1
5
3
1
1
1
3
1
1.00
16
1
204
Wairongo Road wetland
1
5
3
1
1
1
3
1
1.00
16
1
209
Le Grove Wetland
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
257
McCreary Pond
3
3
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
16
1
9
Wairongomai Road Swamp / Lake
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
15
1
Purehurehu
11
Sims Wetland
1
5
1
1
1
2
3
1
1.00
15
1
43
Ngarara Road Wetland A
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
15
1
44
Ngarara Road Wetland B
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
15
1
47
Ngarara Road Wetland C
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
15
1
57
Ngarara Lake
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
15
1
71
Kapiti Airfield Wetland B
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
15
1
94
Unsurveyed Site
1
4
1
1
1
1
5
1
1.00
15
1
104
Papakowhai Bush
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1.00
15
1
127
Gratton's Wetland
2
5
1
1
1
1
3
1
1.00
15
1
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 36

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
APPENDIX 3:
Recommendation for Additional Investigations
Regionally Significant

“Yes”: (Category 4 & 5) no further investigation required.

“Potentially”  (Category  3)  further  investigation  recommended  to  confirm  significance,  based  on
recommendations of earlier studies and observations from this desktop analysis.

“Unlikely” (Category 3) no further investigation recommended.
Additional Field Work to Delineate

“Y”  Identifies  those  sites  where  uncertainty  remains  over  wetland  extent  due  to  inability  to
confidently identify wet / dry boundaries within forest, scrub or grassland.

“N”  Identifies  sites  where  wetland  extent  is  clearly  defined  and  could  be  delineated  with
confidence, or where sites are protected and accurate delineation is not required.

e
k
/U
d l
at
an
/P
e
ni

i
Y
Fil
l

RS
yl
e
l
t
na
d
E
IG
IG
na
anc
oi
o
R

IS
IS
f
t
R
Ecol
oi
ti
k
ID
Wetland Name
O
P
g
ni
r
C
A
W
E
nc
e
g
dd
Notes
S
R
SS
W
C
R
iS
A
wo
Wairarapa Moana
243
5
Y
M-H
4

Y
N
Separate project
Wetlands
56
Waikanae Saltmarsh
5
Y
M-H
4
R
Y
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
Pauatahanui Inlet
101
5

M-H
4
SES 1
Y
Y
Some uncertainty on eastern and southern margin adjacent
Saltmarsh
to township.
Already extensive field work in some areas, and some
Te Hapua Swamp
26
5
Y
H
4
R
Y
Y
boundaries fixed by mediation. Recommend discussion with
Complex A
KCDC before fixing based on this desktop.
Extent of wetland west and north into gully system unclear
261  Lake Pounui
5

M-H
4

Y
Y
in aerials. And extent of swamp vs. dry forest cannot be
defined by aerial.
150  Lake Kohangatera
5

M-H
4

Y
N
Happy with delineation
149  Lake Kohangapiripiri
5

M
3

Y
N
Happy with delineation
Generally happy with delineation, but some margins extend
Te Harakeke
39
5
Y
M-H
3
R
Y
Y
into manuka and extent of wet and dry scrub could be
Wetland
checked.
Pauatahanui Inlet -
100
5

M-H
4
R
Y
N
Happy with delineation
Tidal Flats
Protected (DOC) so accurate delineation not needed. Note
Mount Cone Turf
235
5

H

Y
N
though that cannot accurately determine extent of wet
Bog
grassland from dry tussockland from aerial photos.
99
Horokiri saltmarsh
4

M-H
4
SES 3
Y
N
Happy with delineation
Lake Onoke (incl
265  Pounui Lagoon &
4
Y
M-H
4

Y
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
be highly seasonal.
Kiriwai Lagoon)
Motukaraka
98
saltmarsh / Ration
4

SES 3
Y
N
Happy with delineation
Point
48
Nga Manu Wetland
4

M-H
3
R
Y
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
215  Allens - Lowes Bush
4
Y
M

Y
Y
Extent of wetland into wet pasture and forest not clear in
aerials.
Taupo Swamp
88
4

4
SES 1
Y
N
Happy with delineation
Complex
Lake
7
4
Y
M-H
2
R
Y
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
Kopureherehere
aerials.
Whakatiki River
176
4
Y

Y
Y
Extent of turf, wet scrub and dune vegetation unable to be
Mouth
accurately defined from aerial photo.
155  Turakirae Head
4
Y
H

Y
Y
Extent of turf, wet scrub and dry boulderfield vegetation
unable to be accurately defined from aerial photo.
93
Kakaho Saltmarsh
4

M-H
4
SES 1
Y
N
Happy with delineation
212  Waingawa Swamp
4
Y
M
2

Y
N
Happy with delineation
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 38

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance

e
k
/U
d l
at
an
/P
e
ni

i
Y
Fil
l

RS
yl
e
l
t
na
d
E
IG
IG
na
anc
oi
o
R

IS
IS
f
t
R
Ecol
oi
ti
k
ID
Wetland Name
O
P
g
ni
r
C
A
W
E
nc
e
g
dd
Notes
S
R
SS
W
C
R
iS
A
wo
MacKay's Crossing
82
4

M
2
R
Y
N
Happy with delineation
Swamp
Protected (DOC) so accurate delineation not needed. Note
Kapiti Island Swamp
49
4

Y
N
though that accurate extent of swamp forest cannot be
Forest
determined from aerials.
2
Huritini Swamp
4
Y
M
2
R
Y
Y
Wetland extent into pine and weedland cannot be defined
from aerials.
Protected (DOC) so accurate delineation not needed. Note
Orongorongo
141
4

Y
N
though that accurate extent of wetland into dry forest
Swamp
cannot be determined from aerial photos.
Protected (GWRC) so accurate delineation not needed.
Martin River
123
4

M-H

Y
N
Note though that accurate extent of wetland into dry forest
Wetland
cannot be determined from aerial photos.
Raumati South
76
4

Y
N
Happy with delineation
Peatlands B
Muaupoko Swamp
66
4

R
Y
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
Forest
aerials.
Already extensive field work in some areas, and some
Te Hapua Swamp
27
4
Y
H
4
R
Y
Y
boundaries fixed by mediation. Recommend discussion with
Complex D
KCDC before fixing based on this desktop.
225  Bankview
4
Y

P
Y
Uncertain about ranking of this site. Need to review. Extent
of wetland beneath forest margin.
Fensham & Cobden
213
4
Y
M

Y
Y
Extent of wetland into forest not clear in aerial photos.
Bush & Wetland
Otaki River Mouth
21
Lagoon & Rangiruru
4

M
2
R
Y
Y
Uncertain how much mapped as wetland is dry shrubland.
Wetland
Lake Kaitawa &
Extent of wetland into wet pasture in south and west, and
10
4
Y
M-H
3
R
Y
N
Keelings Bush
into forest in NE not clear in aerials.
Protected (DOC) so accurate delineation not needed. Note
Renata-Aston-Elder
122
4

H

Y
N
though that cannot accurately determine extent of wet
Ridge Turf
grassland from dry tussockland from aerial photos.
Duck Creek
103
4

M-H
4
SES 2
Y
N
Happy with delineation
Saltmarsh
Te Onepoto
102
4

SES 3
Y
N
Happy with delineation
Wetland
Potenti
20
Haruatai Park Forest
4
Y

R
Y
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
al
aerials.
Orui A Whareama
196
3
Y

P
Y
Extent of wetland into wet pasture unclear and likely to be
River Mouth
highly seasonal.
Protected (DOC) so accurate delineation not needed. Happy
31
Okupe Lagoon
3

3

U
N
with delineation
O te Pua (Pukehou /
16
3
Y
M
2
R
P
Y
Extent generally clear except northern fingers into wet
Pritchard's Swamp)
pasture
Potenti
112  Makara Rvr Mth
3

2

U
N
Happy with delineation
al
Lake Waiorongomai
3
3
Y
M-H
3

U
Y
Each data set dramatically different and extent of
Wetlands
wetland/wet pasture likely to be highly seasonal.
239  Turners Lagoon
3
Y

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
be highly seasonal.
191  Otahoua Swamp
3
Y

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
be highly seasonal.
54
El Rancho Wetlands
3

R
P
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
Waimeha Lagoon -
50
Victor Weggery
3

M-H
3
R
P
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
Reserve
Otaki River Mouth
23
3

M
2

U
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
South
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
15
Ngatotara Lagoon
3
Y
M
2
R
P
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
be highly seasonal.
267  Whangaimoana
3

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 39

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance

e
k
/U
d l
at
an
/P
e
ni

i
Y
Fil
l

RS
yl
e
l
t
na
d
E
IG
IG
na
anc
oi
o
R

IS
IS
f
t
R
Ecol
oi
ti
k
ID
Wetland Name
O
P
g
ni
r
C
A
W
E
nc
e
g
dd
Notes
S
R
SS
W
C
R
iS
A
wo
Stream Mouth
be highly seasonal.
Protected (DOC) so accurate delineation not needed. Note
Omega Bogs and
236
3

0

U
N
though that cannot accurately determine extent of wet
Tarns
grassland from dry tussockland from aerial photos.
Honeycomb Rock
234
3
Y

P
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
Terrace
be highly seasonal.
Carters Bush / Pike
Potenti
221
3

2

P
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
Lagoon
al
aerials.
Protected (DOC) so accurate delineation not needed. Note
125  Maymorn Ridge
3

H

P
N
though that cannot accurately determine extent of wet
grassland from dry tussockland from aerial photos.
GWRC land but at risk of forestry so not protected. Some
Whakatikei
124
3

M-H

P
Y
boundaries into pine unclear. Presence of swamp forest
Headwater Swamp
needs to be confirmed.
Queen Elizabeth
79
Park Bush and
3
Y
M
2
L
P
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
Wetlands
Tuturumuri Swamp
269
3

U
Y
Extent of wetland into willow and scrub unclear in aerials.
A
223  Taumata Oxbow
3

M
2

U
N
Happy with delineation
Patanui Stream
Potenti
206
3
Y
2

P
N
Happy with delineation
Mouth
al
Whareama
195
3
Y

0

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
Rivermouth
be highly seasonal.
184  Unknown QE2
3

P
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
Potenti
173  Hidden Lakes
3

2

U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
al
aerials.
Plimmerton Swamp
SES 1
89
3

P
Y
Happy with extent of main wetland. Need to check extent
East
SES 5
of wetland into upper arms of tributaries.
Raumati South
75
3

L
U
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
Peatlands A
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
Te Hapua Wetland
30
3

H

L
U
Y
as for site 26
Complex B
Te Hapua Wetland
29
3

H

R
P
Y
as for site 26
Complex C
Opouawe
289
3

0

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
Rivermouth
be highly seasonal.
283  Tora Coast (d)
3
Y

P
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
be highly seasonal.
Wharekauhau
266
3

H
2

U
Y
Aerial heavily shadowed. Need to confirm inland extent.
Swamp
240  Ruamahanga Loop
3

M
2

U
N
Happy with delineation
Kaiwhata River
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
228
3

0

U
N
Mouth
be highly seasonal.
Kaiwhata River
227
3

U
N
Happy with delineation
Oxbow
Rathkeale College
178
3

P
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
Bush
aerials. Very little printed information on this site.
Mataikona River
167
3

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
Mouth Swamp
be highly seasonal.
GWRC land but at risk of forestry so not protected. Some
126  Whakarikei Wetland
3

M-H

P
Y
boundaries into pine unclear. Presence of swamp forest
needs to be confirmed.
Queen Elizabeth
80
Park Railway
3
Y
M
2

U
Y
Extent of wetland into wet pasture unclear and likely to be
highly seasonal.
Wetlands
60
Tini Bush
3
Y

R
P
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
51
Osbourne's Swamp
3

R
P
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 40

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance

e
k
/U
d l
at
an
/P
e
ni

i
Y
Fil
l

RS
yl
e
l
t
na
d
E
IG
IG
na
anc
oi
o
R

IS
IS
f
t
R
Ecol
oi
ti
k
ID
Wetland Name
O
P
g
ni
r
C
A
W
E
nc
e
g
dd
Notes
S
R
SS
W
C
R
iS
A
wo
Waitohu River
14
3

M
2

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
Mouth Saltmarsh
be highly seasonal.
6
Pylon Swamp
3

M-H
3
L
U
Y
Extent of wetland into wet pasture unclear and likely to be
highly seasonal.
290  White Rock Beach A
3
Y

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
be highly seasonal.
263  Lake Nganoke
3

M-H
3

U
Y
Wetland extent into pine and willow unclear.
Potenti
248  Oporua Bush B, C, D
3

U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
al
aerials.
Wainuiomata
145  Waterworks Swamp
3

H

U
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
Lower
Wainuiomata
144  Waterworks Swamp
3

U
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.
Upper
85
Muri Road Wetland
3

SES 1
U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
Pekapeka Road
34
3

M-H
3
R
P
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
Swamp
be highly seasonal.
12
Forest LakeS
3

M-H
3
L
U
Y
Wetland extent into pine, willow and dry forest unclear.
4
Simcox Lake
3

M
2

U
Y
Extent of wetland into weedland not clear.
Potenti
247  Oporua Bush A
3

U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
al
aerials.
224  Kourarau Dam
3

M
2

U
Y
Extent of wetland into pasture at southern end unclear.
Potenti
222  Taumata Stream
3

2

U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
al
aerials.
220  Brazendale
3

U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
Wainuiomata River
154
3

M
2

U
Y
Dry /wet pasture and wetland margin unclear and likely to
Mouth
be highly seasonal.
117  Karori Dam
3

M-H

U
N
Happy with delineation
Potenti
203  Ruakaka Pond
3

2

U
N
Happy with delineation
al
Ruamahanga River
193
3
Y

U
N
Happy with delineation
Terrace
186  Solway Remnant A
3

U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
64
Ratanui Swamp
3

U
Y
Presence/Extent of swamp forest cannot be determined in
aerials.
Manawa-David
159
3

U
Y
Extent of wet and dry scrub and pasture unclear in aerial
Dalziel
photos. May have over-estimated wetland extent.

NOTE:  The conclusions of other assessments of these sites are provided for context (RAP, SSWIG, WERISIG, Cncl
Ecosite). However, those assessments did not always relate solely to the wetland component of a site. For
example Site 290 (White Rock Beach) has been recommended for protection (RAP). However, the key values of
this site relate to both its geology and the continuum of ecological environments from shingle beach, wetland,
dry duneland and limestone outcroppings. Wetlands therefore only from a small part of this sites value and are
not of themselves regionally significant.

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 41

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
APPENDIX 4:
Differences in delineated wetland area
The following table compares the “GWRC_wet” dataset and the areas produced by this project. The sites are
sorted from largest increase in area to largest decrease in area (ha). There are 201 sites in common. A further
190 sites were added by this project from other datasets, and do not have equivalent sites in the GWRC_wet
dataset for comparison.
BML Wetlands
GWRC Wetlands
Difference in
Difference in
BML ID
WETLAND_NAME
(ha)
(ha)
Area (ha)
Area (%)
243
Wairarapa Moana Wetlands
1928.4
1547.4
381.0
125%
155
Turakirae Head
46.8
2.6
44.2
1812%
125
Maymorn Ridge
24.0
4.0
20.0
606%
39
Te Harakeke Wetland
80.2
66.9
13.3
120%
219
Gretel Dick Wetland
7.2
0.3
6.9
2200%
283
Tora Coast (d)
9.1
2.5
6.6
363%
176
Whakatiki River Mouth
7.9
3.1
4.8
258%
214
Clareville wetland
5.1
1.2
3.9
416%
76
Raumati South Peatlands B
5.0
1.6
3.4
315%
6
Pylon Swamp
5.1
1.8
3.3
284%
197
Whareama Dune System Wetland
4.8
1.6
3.2
309%
124
Whakatikei Headwater Swamp
10.4
7.4
3.1
141%
8
Wairongomai Road Manuka Wetland
7.3
4.3
3.0
169%
15
Ngatotara Lagoon
8.1
5.1
3.0
158%
66
Muaupoko Swamp Forest
6.1
3.2
3.0
193%
233
Glenburn Station
4.6
1.7
2.9
269%
202
Uriti Pont Lagoon
3.7
1.0
2.7
372%
139
Mohaka Street Wetland
7.1
4.4
2.7
161%
69
Kapiti Airfield Wetland A
2.6
0.1
2.5
4382%
290
White Rock Beach A
3.2
0.7
2.5
465%
210
Homewood Dam
3.6
1.1
2.5
322%
198
Orui C & D
5.6
3.1
2.4
177%
288
Tora Coast (a)
14.7
12.5
2.2
118%
292
White Rock Beach B
3.0
0.8
2.2
366%
16
O te Pua (Pukehou / Pritchard's Swamp)
27.4
25.5
1.9
108%
18
Otaki Porirua Trust Board Wetland
2.9
1.0
1.9
294%
217
Allens Bush
2.9
1.1
1.8
269%
12
Waimanguru Lagoon (Forest Lake)
3.0
1.2
1.8
253%
259
Unknown 26
3.8
2.2
1.6
172%
163
Manuka flats
4.7
3.2
1.5
145%
21
Otaki River Mouth Lagoon & Rangiruru Wetland
5.2
3.8
1.5
139%
221
Carters Bush / Pike Lagoon
22.9
21.5
1.4
106%
28
Te Hapua Swamp Complex E
2.7
1.4
1.3
191%
255
Waihora Lagoon
3.2
1.9
1.3
165%
206
Patanui Stream Mouth
6.0
4.8
1.1
124%
83
Whareroa Farm Bush F
1.1
0.0
1.1
2810%
19
Otaki Stewardship area wetland
3.8
2.8
1.1
138%
30
Te Hapua Wetland Complex B
4.3
3.3
1.0
131%
14
Waitohu River Mouth Saltmarsh
7.3
6.3
1.0
116%
170
Trimble Trust
4.6
3.6
1.0
127%
242
Rototawai Lake
9.4
8.4
1.0
111%
145
Wainuiomata Waterworks Swamp Lower
4.8
3.8
0.9
125%
37
Unsurveyed Site 5
3.2
2.3
0.9
140%
31
Okupe Lagoon
10.6
9.7
0.9
109%
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 42

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
BML Wetlands
GWRC Wetlands
Difference in
Difference in
BML ID
WETLAND_NAME
(ha)
(ha)
Area (ha)
Area (%)
88
Taupo Swamp Complex
40.1
39.2
0.9
102%
180
D Cook Wetland
3.0
2.1
0.9
141%
90
The Glenn Wetland
1.5
0.6
0.9
243%
181
Ngakaukau Stream Mouth
1.0
0.2
0.9
587%
225
Bankview
2.6
1.8
0.8
144%
34
Pekapeka Road Swamp
5.0
4.3
0.7
116%
230
Burkhart Wetlands
2.4
1.7
0.7
138%
191
Otahoua Swamp
3.1
2.4
0.7
127%
209
Le Grove Wetland
0.9
0.3
0.6
344%
235
Mount Cone Turf Bog
9.3
8.6
0.6
107%
115
Quartz Hill Swamp
1.5
0.9
0.6
171%
154
Wainuiomata River Mouth
1.6
1.0
0.5
153%
226
Wainuioru River Bush
0.9
0.4
0.5
217%
252
Donalds Wetland
1.5
1.1
0.5
142%
211
Egan (a)
3.3
2.8
0.4
116%
114
Opau Stream Wetland A
2.9
2.5
0.4
118%
92
Horokiri Raupo Swamp
1.2
0.8
0.4
149%
99
Horokiri saltmarsh
6.6
6.2
0.4
106%
109
Okiwai Lagoon and Wetlands
3.0
2.6
0.4
114%
20
Haruatai Park Forest
7.3
7.0
0.4
105%
77
Poplar Ave Wetland
3.5
3.1
0.4
112%
94
Unsurveyed Site
1.1
0.7
0.4
148%
87
Battle Hill Ponds
1.2
0.9
0.3
138%
108
Aotea Lagoon
3.0
2.7
0.3
111%
137
Mowlem Bush
0.7
0.4
0.3
173%
161
Owhanga Coast (Chimnes)
5.2
4.9
0.3
106%
260
Ti Kouka Swamp
1.1
0.8
0.3
132%
55
Waikanae River Oxbow
0.5
0.2
0.2
204%
185
Rare Animal Farm
0.6
0.3
0.2
167%
249
Moeraki
1.8
1.5
0.2
114%
91
West Horokiri Wetland
2.0
1.8
0.2
111%
232
Waimoana Wetland
1.2
1.0
0.2
120%
266
Wharekauhau Swamp
5.4
5.2
0.2
104%
127
Gratton's Wetland
1.2
1.0
0.2
118%
220
Brazendale
1.6
1.5
0.2
111%
280
Kaiwaka Road A
1.5
1.3
0.1
111%
253
Waituna Western Bush
1.5
1.4
0.1
109%
95
Motukaraka West Wetland
0.6
0.5
0.1
127%
277
Opouawe River Swamp B
1.2
1.1
0.1
111%
273
Tora Road Wetland
0.6
0.5
0.1
121%
175
Davidson Wetland
0.4
0.3
0.1
140%
22
269-281 SH1 Otaki
0.8
0.7
0.1
113%
160
Bushgate
1.0
0.9
0.1
110%
1
South Waikawa Beach Dune Lake
0.7
0.6
0.1
114%
285
Kawakawa Dune Hollow
0.6
0.6
0.1
115%
262
Kiriwai farm
1.1
1.0
0.1
108%
72
Andrews Pond
1.3
1.3
0.1
106%
97
Camborne Scarp wetland
0.2
0.1
0.1
148%
287
Tora Coast (b)
12.6
12.5
0.1
101%
227
Kaiwhata River Oxbow
2.3
2.2
0.1
103%
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 43

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
BML Wetlands
GWRC Wetlands
Difference in
Difference in
BML ID
WETLAND_NAME
(ha)
(ha)
Area (ha)
Area (%)
103
Duck Creek Saltmarsh
1.2
1.2
0.1
105%
281
Kaiwaka Road B
0.6
0.6
0.1
110%
102
Te Onepoto Wetland
0.9
0.8
0.0
105%
216
Carterton Golf Course
2.1
2.1
0.0
102%
247
Oporua Bush A
2.3
2.3
0.0
102%
130
Ladel Bend Wetland
2.6
2.5
0.0
101%
143
Unsurveyed 16
0.2
0.2
0.0
113%
93
Kakaho Saltmarsh
2.4
2.4
0.0
101%
251
Te Hopai Lagoon
12.1
12.1
0.0
100%
238
Elm Grove (Kempton)
1.6
1.6
0.0
100%
186
Solway Remnant A
1.9
1.9
0.0
100%
187
Solway Remnants B
1.0
1.1
0.0
97%
245
Wairongomai
0.3
0.3
0.0
90%
101
Pauatahanui Inlet Saltmarsh
37.1
37.1
0.0
100%
98
Motukaraka saltmarsh / Ration Point
1.0
1.0
0.0
97%
237
Woodside Bush Fragments
2.2
2.2
0.0
98%
67
Crown HIll Manuka Bush
0.5
0.6
0.0
93%
152
Unsurveyed 11
0.6
0.7
0.0
94%
153
Unsurveyed site 1
2.0
2.0
0.0
98%
203
Ruakaka Pond
2.5
2.6
0.0
98%
205
Wairongo Stream Wetland
0.5
0.6
0.0
92%
231
Watipu Farm Dam
2.8
2.8
-0.1
98%
60
Tini Bush
1.3
1.3
-0.1
96%
258
Battery Pond
1.0
1.1
-0.1
94%
89
Plimmerton Swamp East
3.3
3.4
-0.1
98%
147
Sugarloaf Bush
2.2
2.3
-0.1
97%
11
Sims Wetland
0.7
0.8
-0.1
90%
177
Matahiwi Bush II
1.9
2.0
-0.1
96%
151
Paiaka Stream Wetland
1.1
1.2
-0.1
92%
70
Kapiti Road Wetland A
0.6
0.7
-0.1
86%
257
McCreary Pond
1.2
1.3
-0.1
90%
123
Martin River Wetland
8.4
8.6
-0.1
98%
58
Lion Downs Bush
1.5
1.7
-0.1
91%
36
Unsurveyed Site 12
0.6
0.8
-0.2
80%
84
Bells Bush
0.2
0.4
-0.2
52%
194
Willy Cranswick Wetland
0.4
0.6
-0.2
66%
199
Motuwaireka Rivermouth & Shelton Wetland
2.0
2.2
-0.2
91%
126
Whakarikei Wetland
6.6
6.9
-0.2
97%
270
Tuturumuri Swamp B
1.0
1.2
-0.2
81%
166
Cambell / Connell Dam
4.3
4.6
-0.2
95%
112
Makara Rvr Mth
5.4
5.7
-0.3
96%
54
El Rancho Wetlands
8.5
8.8
-0.3
97%
106
Romesdale Lagoon
0.7
1.0
-0.3
72%
59
Turf Farm Dune Forest
0.2
0.5
-0.3
38%
204
Wairongo Road wetland
0.5
0.8
-0.3
59%
218
Main Road Swamp (Foreman)
4.2
4.6
-0.4
92%
201
Uriti Point
0.3
0.8
-0.4
46%
13
Lake Rotopotakataka (Forest Lake)
0.6
1.0
-0.4
56%
254
M. Sutherland
2.9
3.4
-0.5
85%
141
Orongorongo Swamp
5.5
6.0
-0.5
91%
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 44

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
BML Wetlands
GWRC Wetlands
Difference in
Difference in
BML ID
WETLAND_NAME
(ha)
(ha)
Area (ha)
Area (%)
284
Tora Coast (c)
2.3
2.9
-0.5
82%
86
Swampy Gully, Battle Hill
1.4
2.0
-0.6
71%
74
Kaitawa Reserve Swamp Forest
0.4
1.0
-0.6
40%
264
Turanganui Pond
0.8
1.4
-0.6
55%
171
Gary Daniells
4.5
5.1
-0.7
87%
120
Red Rocks
1.0
1.6
-0.7
58%
128
Stock Car wetland
3.1
3.8
-0.7
81%
183
Henley Lakes
1.6
2.4
-0.7
69%
248
Oporua Bush B, C, D
7.9
8.7
-0.8
91%
212
Waingawa Swamp
11.6
12.4
-0.8
94%
293
Punaruku Lagoon
0.5
1.3
-0.8
39%
269
Tuturumuri Swamp A
4.0
4.9
-0.9
82%
2
Huritini Swamp
26.2
27.1
-0.9
97%
188
Henley Lakes A
3.2
4.1
-0.9
78%
64
Ratanui Swamp
1.5
2.5
-1.0
61%
38
Unsurveyed Site 11
0.7
1.7
-1.0
40%
172
Kiriwhakapapa Lagoon
6.2
7.2
-1.0
86%
276
Castle River
3.0
4.1
-1.1
74%
56
Waikanae Saltmarsh
19.5
20.6
-1.1
95%
119
Karori Reservoir
0.1
1.2
-1.1
7%
200
Riversdale South Dunes
2.6
3.8
-1.2
69%
82
MacKay's Crossing Swamp
8.5
9.7
-1.2
88%
50
Waimeha Lagoon - Victor Weggery Reserve
4.1
5.3
-1.2
77%
173
Hidden Lakes
1.0
2.3
-1.3
45%
146
Unsurveyed wetland
0.7
2.1
-1.4
34%
29
Te Hapua Wetland Complex C
7.4
8.9
-1.5
83%
236
Omega Bogs and Tarns
3.0
4.5
-1.6
65%
148
Wainuiomata RIver Bush A
0.8
2.5
-1.7
31%
159
Manawa-David Dalziel
0.6
2.6
-2.0
23%
117
Karori Dam
0.4
2.6
-2.2
15%
53
Waimanu Lagoons
0.6
3.2
-2.6
20%
5
Simcox Swamp
7.3
10.1
-2.8
72%
215
Allens - Lowes Bush
47.6
50.8
-3.2
94%
213
Fensham & Cobden Bush & Wetland
4.3
7.5
-3.2
57%
239
Turners Lagoon
12.2
15.6
-3.4
78%
223
Taumata Oxbow
10.4
14.1
-3.7
74%
224
Kourarau Dam
4.0
8.2
-4.2
49%
85
Muri Road Wetland
2.5
7.0
-4.5
35%
3
Lake Waiorongomai Wetlands
10.1
15.1
-5.0
67%
48
Nga Manu Wetland
26.1
32.0
-5.9
82%
4
Simcox Lake
4.2
10.1
-5.9
42%
7
Lake Kopureherehere
3.1
9.2
-6.1
33%
263
Lake Nganoke
1.2
8.3
-7.0
15%
140
Skull Gully Wetland
2.9
10.0
-7.1
29%
80
Queen Elizabeth Park Railway Wetlands
9.7
16.8
-7.1
58%
51
Osbourne's Swamp
2.4
9.7
-7.3
25%
32
Te Hapua Swamp Complex F
1.6
8.9
-7.3
18%
134
Johnson's Road Wetland
0.6
8.5
-7.9
7%
149
Lake Kohangapiripiri
19.6
30.6
-11.0
64%
26
Te Hapua Swamp Complex A
38.0
50.0
-12.1
76%
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 45

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
BML Wetlands
GWRC Wetlands
Difference in
Difference in
BML ID
WETLAND_NAME
(ha)
(ha)
Area (ha)
Area (%)
79
Queen Elizabeth Park Bush and Wetlands
3.4
16.8
-13.4
20%
10
Lake Kaitawa & Keelings Bush
15.2
31.2
-16.0
49%
150
Lake Kohangatera
72.0
88.9
-16.9
81%
27
Te Hapua Swamp Complex D
12.0
50.0
-38.1
24%
261
Lake Pounui
19.3
63.9
-44.6
30%
131
Mangaroa Swamp South
63.0
148.6
-85.5
42%
265
Lake Onoke (incl Pounui Lagoon & Kiriwai Lagoon)
252.3
798.3
-546.0
32%
Sites added during this study (not in GWRC_Wet)
9
Wairongomai Road Swamp / Lake Purehurehu
2.4
-
-
-
17
K201 Recommended
2.5
-
-
-
23
Otaki River Mouth South
10.4
-
-
-
24
Mangaone Stream Mouth
4.1
-
-
-
25
Rahui Road Bush C / Croads Bush Gully
6.8
-
-
-
33
Kowhai Stream Mouth (Hadfields)
2.2
-
-
-
35
Unknown
1.0
-
-
-
40
Unknown
1.7
-
-
-
41
Waimeha Stream Mouth
17.0
-
-
-
42
Ngarara Bush
0.9
-
-
-
43
Ngarara Road Wetland A
1.3
-
-
-
44
Ngarara Road Wetland B
0.7
-
-
-
45
Ngarara Road Wetland D
2.5
-
-
-
46
Unknown
2.0
-
-
-
47
Ngarara Road Wetland C
0.6
-
-
-
49
Kapiti Island Swamp Forest
0.5
-
-
-
57
Ngarara Lake
1.6
-
-
-
61
Otaihanga Landfill North
0.8
-
-
-
62
Otaihanga Landfill Central
1.3
-
-
-
63
Otaihanga Landfill South
1.4
-
-
-
65
Reikorangi Road Bush D
1.7
-
-
-
68
Kapiti Airfield Raupo Swamp
0.3
-
-
-
71
Kapiti Airfield Wetland B
0.8
-
-
-
73
Wharemauku Stream Mouth
2.9
-
-
-
75
Raumati South Peatlands A
2.1
-
-
-
78
Whareroa Estuary
5.6
-
-
-
81
Wainui Stream Mouth
9.4
-
-
-
96
Mana Island
1.2
-
-
-
100
Pauatahanui Inlet - Tidal Flats
466.8
-
-
-
104
Papakowhai Bush
0.8
-
-
-
105
Papakowhai Lagoon
0.5
-
-
-
107
Porirua Harbour (Onepoto Arm) - Tidal Flats
250.8
-
-
-
110
Cannons Creek Lakes
1.1
-
-
-
111
Hawkins Gully Wetland
1.3
-
-
-
113
Opau Stream Wetland B
0.2
-
-
-
116
Kaiwharawhara Stream Mouth
1.1
-
-
-
118
Karori Reservoir Swamp Forest
0.2
-
-
-
121
Sinclair Head
1.7
-
-
-
122
Renata-Aston-Elder Ridge Turf
31.3
-
-
-
129
Wi Tako Ghania wetland
2.0
-
-
-
132
Mangaroa Swamp
1.7
-
-
-
133
Blue Mountain Bush Swamp Forest
7.7
-
-
-
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 46

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
BML Wetlands
GWRC Wetlands
Difference in
Difference in
BML ID
WETLAND_NAME
(ha)
(ha)
Area (ha)
Area (%)
135
Korokoro Stream Mouth
1.3
-
-
-
136
Hutt Rivermouth
3.3
-
-
-
138
Waiwhetu Rivermouth
1.3
-
-
-
142
Gracefield Scrub / Waiau Wetland
4.0
-
-
-
144
Wainuiomata Waterworks Swamp Upper
6.5
-
-
-
156
Owahanga Tussockland
1.0
-
-
-
157
Waipaua Stream Shrubland
3.6
-
-
-
158
Spot 424 Bog
2.2
-
-
-
162
Kakaumu Dams North
3.2
-
-
-
164
Kakaumu Dam West
2.2
-
-
-
165
Kakaumu Dam East
3.2
-
-
-
167
Mataikona River Mouth Swamp
3.4
-
-
-
168
Waimeha Trust Covenant
0.2
-
-
-
169
T J Campbell Covenent
2.4
-
-
-
174
Okau Stream Mouth
14.7
-
-
-
178
Rathkeale College Bush
13.2
-
-
-
179
Titoki Dams Wetland
0.4
-
-
-
182
"Humpy" Stream Mouth
28.1
-
-
-
184
Unknown QE2
5.2
-
-
-
189
Otahome Stream Mouth
12.2
-
-
-
190
Waipawa Stream Wetland
0.6
-
-
-
192
Ruamahunga Oxbow
0.9
-
-
-
193
Ruamahanga River Terrace
1.1
-
-
-
195
Whareama Rivermouth
73.9
-
-
-
196
Orui A Whareama River Mouth
8.0
-
-
-
207
Homewood Road Unsurveyed
1.7
-
-
-
208
Waikaraka Stream Mouth
10.0
-
-
-
222
Taumata Stream
2.3
-
-
-
228
Kaiwhata River Mouth
5.1
-
-
-
229
Caledonia Wetland
3.8
-
-
-
234
Honeycomb Rock Terrace
6.6
-
-
-
240
Ruamahanga Loop
9.9
-
-
-
241
Hikiinui Road Lagoon
1.3
-
-
-
244
Mahaki Swamp
3.9
-
-
-
246
Pukio Oxbow
5.4
-
-
-
250
Dunrobin Loop
2.2
-
-
-
256
Unknown (not Battery Pond)
3.6
-
-
-
267
Whangaimoana Stream Mouth
14.5
-
-
-
268
Pahaoa
2.5
-
-
-
271
Tuturumuri Swamp C
1.5
-
-
-
272
Rerewhakaaitu Rivermouth
6.8
-
-
-
274
Oterei River Mouth
0.7
-
-
-
275
Makotukutuku Stream mouth (Washpool)
5.6
-
-
-
278
Awhea River
1.0
-
-
-
279
Awheaiti Stream Mouth
13.1
-
-
-
282
Pararaki Stream mouth, Cape Palliser
12.2
-
-
-
286
Otekaha Stream mouth, Cape Palliser
40.9
-
-
-
289
Opouawe Rivermouth
29.2
-
-
-
291
Te Kaukau Point Seal Haulout
4.7
-
-
-

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 47

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
APPENDIX 5:
Data Table Example
Wetland ID
26
Object ID
513
Wetland Name
Te Hapua Swamp Complex A
SUMMARY: Site
Context
Very large dune wetland / part of wetland complex / a freshwater link / in pasture
ET_X
1775110
ET_Y
5479592
PERIM (m)
9517
AREA (ha)
37.97
TA
1. Kapiti Coast District
Distance to
Nearest (km)
0
Nearest Object ID
27
Bioclimatic Zone
Coastal
Hydrologic Class
Palustrine
Wetland Type
Swamp
GWRC Extent ID
192, Part 193, 197, 59
GWRC Wet ID
38
Wet Name
38: Te Hapua Wetland Complex A
Artificial 1
although some open water is artificial
Artificial Y-N
N
Structures
Northern end of wetland is drained. Artificial water bodies.
Structure Score
3
Modified
Groundwater catchment now in pasture
Modified Score
3
Buffer
In some parts landowners are trying to establish a vegetated buffer
Buffer Score
4
Fenced
Only partially fenced
Grazed
Some parts are leased for grazing dry-stock
Grazed Score
3
GWRC Hydro ID
209.00
GWRC Hydro 2
1: Flaxland
GWRC Hydro 3
1: Harakeke
Mostly at the edges
Cncl
K055
EcoS ID
K193
Cncl EcoS Name
K055: Te Hapua Road, Swamp A
K193: Recommended eco-site
Cncl EcoS Rank
R
Large representative example of habitat that was formally characteristic of the area. Provides habitat for
Cncl EcoS Notes
spotless crake. Also Ranunculus macropus, Carex dipsacea, Potentilla anserinioides, (Enright & John 2001)
and other species becoming uncommon in the Wellington Region including Gratiola sexdenta, kapungawha
and Baumea articulata. Protected in parts by QEII Covenant - with a further area under negotiation.
DoC EcoS ID
334
DoC EcoS Name
334: TE HAPUA ROAD SWAMP A
Doc EcoS Dist
Foxton
BML_W10140_20110620

Page 48

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
WERISIG
4
SSWISIG
H
Doc EcoS Rank
H
Doc EcoS Notes 1
Open water-wetland
flaxland on sand plain
Complex swamp system in good condition, diverse avifauna. Rural development nearby (WERI)
DoC EcoS Notes 2
Large diversity of bird species. Large variety of habitats(SSWI)
Part of a more extensive system (MERPNA, NZWSNHR)
RAP1. Good waterfowl habitat (though artificial)(F
RAP ID
9
RAP Name
RAP9: Te Hapua Road Swamp
RAP Rank
1
Representativeness H Best example of once extensive wetland communities
Diversity L
Special Features M Good waterfowl habitat
RAP Notes
Naturalness H
Viability M Will deteriorate slowly unless watertable restored.
Size & Shape M
Buffering M Partly fenced. Buffered by wetness and density.
DOC CU ID
Na
DoC CU Name
Na
DoC CU Notes
Na
5/07/320
5/07/468
5/07/571
QEII Site ID
5/07/446
5/07/291.1
5/07/291.2
5/07/443
5/07/356
QEII Site Notes
Na
GWRC Tender
Na
Estuary ID
Na
Estuary Rank
Na
Estuary Notes
Na
DoC CMS
Y
AUSSEIL ID
(106) 09
AUSSEIL Score
0.40
RAMSAR
Na
Ravine 1992
NZWSNHR
SSWI 26/17 3
FOXTONPNA RAP9
Bibliography
MANER 16
Wildland
Doc Ecosite
Aussiel et al
FENZ
GWRC_Wet

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 49

WETLANDS OF THE WELLINGTON REGION
Desktop Delineation and Assessment of Significance
APPENDIX 6:
Assessment Criteria
Updated following the workshop on 9 September 2011

Representativeness
Rarity
Diversity
Context
Representativeness: high representativeness values are given to
Rarity: the ecosystem or habitat has biological physical features that are scarce or threatened in a
Diversity: the ecosystem or
Ecological context of an area: the ecosystem or habitat:

particular ecosystems and habitats that were once typical and
local, regional or national context. This can include individual species, rare and distinctive biological
habitat has a natural diversity
(i)
enhances connectivity or otherwise buffers representative,
commonplace in a district or in the region, and:
communities and physical features that are unusual or rare.
of ecological units, ecosystems,
ank
rare or diverse indigenous ecosystems and habitats; or
R
(i)  are no longer commonplace (less than about 30% remaining);
species and physical features
(ii)
provides seasonal or core habitat for protected or
or
within an area.
threatened indigenous species.
(ii)  are poorly represented in existing protected areas (less than
about 20% legally protected).

1 Representative
2 LENZ
3 Habitats
4 Flora
5 Fauna
6 Communities
7 Connectivity
8 Seasonal patterns
Wetlands that are typical and
Acutely Threatened
Large and diverse indigenous
Large and diverse populations /
A small number of two or more
A high diversity of indigenous
Key part of extensive system of
Large and diverse seasonal
characteristic of those

communities and habitats that
communities of threatened /
nationally threatened species,
wetland types and structural
wetlands and waterways that
population of migrants and / or
originally present prior to
Example: Muaupoko Swamp
are rare / uncommon.
uncommon flora.
or large numbers of a regionally
classes (5+) and a high diversity
may extend uninterrupted from
a core breeding habitat for
human occupation; or a
threatened species of rare
of species of flora and fauna.
the wetland margins to forests,
more than three threatened or
5
Forest
Example: Allen – Lowes Bush
Example: Mt Cone Turf Bog
wetland that is the best
flora.
Example: Te Hapua Swamp
coasts and rivers that is
protected resident species.
example of its type remaining
Example: Wairarapa Moana
Complex A
functionally natural, largely
Example: Waikanae Saltmarsh
in the region.
Wetlands
intact and well buffered.
Example: Lake Kohangatera
Example: Lake Pounui
Wetlands that are typical and
Chronically Threatened
Several indigenous
A small number of two or more
A small number of one or more
All the types of above but of a
All the elements of above but
Small numbers of a variety of
characteristic of those

communities and habitats that
nationally threatened species,
regionally threatened species,
smaller scale ( 5+) or a high
of a smaller scale (< 10 ha
migrant species, and / or large
originally present prior to
Example: Tora Coast Wetlands
are rare / uncommon.
or large numbers of a regionally
or large numbers of locally
diversity of species of flora and
wetland). Is buffered from
numbers of a single migrant
human occupation, but where
Example: Te Hapua Swamp
threatened species of rare
threatened species of flora.
fauna within a wetland of lower
adjoining land uses at least in
species relies on site and/or an
parts of the wetland are not in
flora.
type diversity.
part, by native vegetation.
important breeding habitat for
4
Complex A
Example: Lake Pounui
original condition; or a wetland
Example: Waikanae Saltmarsh
Example: Huritini Swamp
Example: Taupo Swamp
between 1 and 3 threatened or
that is the best example of its
protected resident species.
type remaining in the ecological
Example: Te Harakeke
district.
Wetlands
Example: Taupo Swamp
Wetlands that are typical and
At Risk (20-30%)
A single rare / uncommon
A small number of one or more
A small number of one or more
Moderate diversity of wetland
A physical connection (stream,
Records of breeding by a
characteristic examples of the

indigenous habitat /
regionally threatened species,
regionally threatened species,
types and structural classes (3-
drain, bush) to other nearby
threatened or protected
original or current natural
Example: Wainuiomata
community recorded
or large numbers of locally
or large numbers of locally
5) with a high indigenous
waterbodies but modification
species, and or a record of an
diversity of wetland types in
threatened species of flora.
threatened species of flora.
component and moderate
limits ecological service,
itinerant migrant.
3
Waterworks Swamp
Example: El Rancho Wetlands
the ecological district (but not
Example: Kakaho Saltmarsh
Example: Taumata Oxbow
species diversity.
unlikely to buffer or enhance
Example: Lake Waiorongomai
the best examples remaining).
Example: Osbournes Swamp
other sites. Has limited
Wetlands
Example: Lake Wairongomai
buffering
Wetlands
Example: Lake Waiorongomai
Wetlands that retain only
Critically Under protected (>
No rare / uncommon habitat /
A small number o f one or more
A small number o f one or more
Low diversity of wetland types
No physical connection to other  No migrants recorded but the
limited elements that are
30%)
community recorded (but
locally threatened species of
locally threatened species of
and structural classes (2-3) and
waterbodies or indigenous
habitat is likely to support their
typical of the natural diversity
habitat may support rarity > 3
flora.
flora.
a low species diversity.
vegetation but other wetland
presence.
2

of an ecological district.
Example: Opouawe River
ha)
Example: Hutt River Mouth
Example: Huritini Swamp
Example: Andrews Pond
sites in close proximity (0.5 – 1
Example: Lake Waimanguru -
Example: Pylon Swamp
Swamp
Example: Te Hapua Swamp
km). Is poorly buffered.
Forest Lakes
Complex D
Example: Andrews Pond
Wetlands that contain little or
Under protected or No Threat
No rare / uncommon habitat /
No rare or uncommon flora
No rare or uncommon flora
Wetland monoculture 1-2
No physical connection to other  No migrants recorded (and
no elements that are
Category
community recorded. Site small
recorded.
recorded.
wetland types and structural
waterbodies or indigenous
visible habitat unlikely to
representative of the natural

to very small.
Example: Karori Dam
Example: Sims Wetland
classes, and low species
vegetation and very isolated
support)
1
diversity of an ecological
Example: Mt Cone Turf Bog
Example: Ladel Bend Wetland
diversity.
(>1km). Has little or no
Example: Pylon Swamp
district.
Example: Okiwai Lagoon
buffering from adjoining land
Example: Hutt River Mouth
uses.
Example: Taumata Oxbow

BML_W10140_20110620

Page 50