Site Loader

Weed Control and Monitoring in Tuff Crater Reserve, North Shore, Auckland. Date: May 2010. Table of Contents Summary3 1. Introduction4 2. Background4 2. 1. Objectives4 2. 2. Description of the Area5 2. 3. Site Location8 2. 4. Site Plan9 2. 5. Plan of Management Unit 7. 10 2. 6. Incorporation of Relevant Statutory and Policy Documents10 3. Method12 3. 1. Sampling Methods12 3. 1. 1. Plot Procedure12 3. 1. 2. Photo Point13 3. 2. Controlling Methods13 3. 2. 1. Herbicides13 3. 2. 2. Manual Weed Control14 4. Result14 4. 1. Result monitoring15 4. 2. Outcome monitoring15 4. 3.

Graphs of the weed monitoring16 4. 3. 1. Graph of elaeagnus density in the plot area before the weed control16 4. 3. 2. Graph of elaeagnus density in the plot area after the weed control16 4. 3. 3. Graph of weed density in the plot area before the weed control17 4. 3. 4. Graph of weed density in the plot area after the weed control17 5. Conclusions18 6. Recommendations19 6. 1. Approaches19 6. 2. Data entry, verification and editing20 6. 3. Recommendations for routine data summaries and statistical analyses to detect change. 21 6. 4. Recommended reporting schedule. 1 7. Acknowledgements23 8. References23 9. Appendices26 Appendix 1: Weeds species observed on some of the transect lines at Tuff Crater on 1/05/2010. 26 Appendix 2: Exotic species observed at Tuff Crater on November 2008 and classification under the RPMS 2007-2012 by abundance. 28 Summary The uniqueness of much of New Zealand’s indigenous biodiversity means that it cannot be conserved in nature elsewhere in the world. A sudden drastic change such as the introduction of alien plants will have a negative effect on natural ecosystems and biodiversity in New Zealand.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Non-native invasive plant species are recognized worldwide as a threat to biological diversity, second only to direct habitat loss and fragmentation. Auckland has been identified as the weediest city in New Zealand by the Auckland Regional Council. Tuff Crater is a narrow coastal reserve in North Shore, Auckland, which is heavily infested with weeds such as elaeagnus, pampas grass, tree privet, Chinese privet, gorse, moth plant, wattle and climbing asparagus. This monitoring report provides information and procedures for monitoring the effectiveness of weed control work done in Tuff Crater during the second quarter of 2010.

The goal of this report is to identify and monitor pest plants during a weed control programme conducted at Management Unit 7 of the reserve. Targeted application of herbicides and manual methods are the main approaches used. Plot procedure 20 x 20m sampling method using line transects and quadrats were applied to record inventory populations of weeds located on site. Data entry involved transporting raw data from field sheets into an electronic form. Weeds such as elaeagnus which covered whole cliff sides of Management Unit 7 were successfully controlled using manual methods.

The above monitoring helps to determine that the weed control methods used are effective to protect the native vegetation and habitats of indigenous species in the reserve. It is recommended that introduced species diversity and abundance data are stored in a Geo-Spatial Database. This information could be used to observe trends, create data summaries and conduct statistical analyses to assist in the long-term plan to restore Tuff Crater to a self sustaining indigenous ecosystem. 1. Introduction

This report is an investigation into weed control and monitoring in Tuff Crater, North Shore, Auckland. It provides information, procedures and identifies the effectiveness of a weed-control programme, conducted by The Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand (Forest & Bird), North Shore. Forest & Bird is New Zealand’s largest independent conservation organisation that works to preserve natural heritage and native species. The current scope for this report is to identify and monitor pest plants during a restoration project done in the second quarter of 2010.

Weeds are abundant and widespread in the reserve which could have adverse effects on native species and local ecosystems. Current restoration will involve controlling and eradicating these weeds from the Management Unit 7 (MU7) area of the reserve. The long-term plan is in progress for the Tuff Crater reserve, to provide a ten-year programme for weed control and revegetation of native plants to restore the area to a self sustaining indigenous ecosystem. 2. Background 2. 1. Objectives A natural ecosystem is complex and intricate where different species of plants have an effect on each other.

Introduced plants grow fast and displace indigenous species, destroying the native ecosystem and biodiversity which has taken thousands of years to evolve. This will likely increase the risk of total extinction of critically endangered plant and animal species native to New Zealand. Objectives of this monitoring are to determine successful outcomes in the protection of native vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous species in the Tuff Crater reserve. Auckland region has over 1000 alien introduced species (Auckland Regional Council, 2002, p. ) which self propagate in the wild. Many of these are considered weeds and cause serious destruction to the natural environment and biodiversity in Auckland’s reserves. Auckland has been identified as the weediest city in New Zealand and more than half of the reserves in North Shore are affected by a moderate to severe degree by invasive weeds (The North Shore City, 2005, p. 8). Non-native invasive plant species are recognized worldwide as a threat to biological diversity, second only to direct habitat loss and fragmentation. 2. 2. Description of the Area

Te Kopua o Matakamokamo or Tuff Crater is a narrow coastal reserve bordering the volcanic tuff crater in Northcote, Auckland. The total area of the reserve is 30. 7 ha, ranging from 0-20m elevation above sea level (Happy, 2009, p. 7). It is one of the several explosion craters in the region, formed 30,000-40,000 years ago when rising magma forced a one-off explosion, leaving a ring of tuff or volcanic ash. (Denny, 2008, p. 3) A former fresh water crater lake formed by these eruptions has become an area with pockets of freshwater wetland, mangrove estuary and salt marsh communities.

The reserve has indigenous plant species with recent and established plantings, habitats with various fish and bird species, including threatened New Zealand Dotterel (Charadrius obscurus) (Happy, 2009, p. 11). Tuff Crater’s vegetation type is one of four remnants of once more extensive broadleaved forest on volcanic tuff crater soils (The North Shore City, 2005, p. 4). With regionally uncommon vegetation type, it is important to protect and enhance the reserve and its flora and fauna (Happy, 2009, p. 10).

Coastal broadleaf forest dominated by kohekohe (Dysoxylum spectabile) is established in some areas, with other species such as kowhai (Sophora sp. ), manuka (Leptospermum scoparium), kanuka (Kunzea ericoides), karamu (Coprosma robusta), mapou (Myrsine australis), flax (Phormium tenax), puriri (Vitex lucens), mahoe (Melicytus ramiflorus), kawakawa (Macropiper excelsum) and pohutukawa (Metrosideros excelsa). In addition, the crater’s lagoon provides critical habitats such as swamp and salt meadows for species, such as ecologically significant intertidal mangrove (Avicennia australis var. esinifera), salt marsh ribbonwood (Plagianthus divaricatus), glasswort (Sarcocornia quinqueflora), sea primrose (Samolus repens), remuremu (Selliera radicans) and brass button (Cotula coronopifolia). Other areas within the Tuff Crater Reserve are largely dominated by exotic flora such as willow (Salix sp. ) and privet (Ligustrum spp. ). Invasive exotic ground cover, vine and tree species are a common site in the reserve and in some areas weeds are the only vegetation maintaining stability to steep slopes, such as elaeagnus (Elaeagnus x reflexa).

One of the most serious threats to Auckland’s ecological systems is the spread of weeds within remaining bush remnants and corridors such as Tuff Crater reserve (Happy, 2009, p. 1). The reserve’s native ground covers are not abundant due to infestation and competition from invasive exotic plants. Some of these weeds species have the capacity to blanket areas of natural vegetation and they have grown quickly to smother native species. At the reserve, weeds such as elaeagnus cover whole cliff sides spanning about 50m and forms dense stands which can climb meters up into established bush, displacing native species up to mid canopy.

Some parts of the reserve are heavily infested with invasive weeds such as pampas grass (Cortaderia selloanajubata), tree privet (Ligustrum lucidum), moth plant (Araujia hortorum), gorse (Ulex europaeus), Chinese privet Ligustrum (sinense), wattle (Paraserianthes lophantha), climbing asparagus (T. erythrospermum), tradescantia (Tradescantia fluminensis), kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum), wild ginger (Hedychium gardnerianum) and many more. (Appendix 2) The indigenous species in New Zealand, which have taken thousands or millions of years to evolve, never had the opportunity to develop against the alien arrivals.

These environmental pest species will limit the opportunities for space, light, water, nutrients, access for pollination, seed dispersal and germination (Shadforth, nd) for the native plants. These weeds have naturalised into New Zealand’s native ecosystems as they can grow effortlessly in the environment. Their presence is a well-known threat as these invasive species can colonise quickly, aggressively and are excessively competitive. 2. 3. Site Location [pic] Figure 1: Location Map of Tuff Crater (Google Maps).

The crater site is bordered in the south by tidal feed to the wetland, in the west by houses, in the north by a business park, and in the east by the northern motorway (closer to the Esmond Road exit). Across the motorway mangroves and shell banks form the foreground to Shoal Bay. A few kilometres across the bay are the Sky Tower and cityscape. The 2001 Census found 933 families live in the area of Tuff Crater, with a total population of around four thousand (Happy, 2009, p. 4). 2. 4. Site Plan [pic] Figure 2: Site Plan of Tuff Crater (Knight, nd). (Note that scale is less than 1:2000)

The reserve is divided into eight Management Units for easy identification. Section from MU7 was used as the monitoring plot. The vegetation type in this MU is largely exotic, mainly pampas and elaeagnus. The canopy is often dominated by exotic privet. In addition gorse, moth plant and arum lily are present in this area. Silver fern, mamaku, mahoe, hangehange and other species of natives are sporadic throughout this area. Native ground covers areas closer to Management Unit 8 are not abundant due to invasive species such as tradescantia (Tradescantia fluminensis) and kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum). . 5. Plan of Management Unit 7. Figure 3: High Density Weeds within Management Unit 7 (Happy, 2009, p. 30). 2. 6. Incorporation of Relevant Statutory and Policy Documents Forest & Bird and the North Shore City Council (NSCC) are in partnership on this project. These weeds are subject to control under the Regional Pest Management Strategy 2002-2007 formulated by the Auckland Regional Council, under the Bio security Act 1993. Forest and Bird, North Shore and volunteers have joined forces to develop programmes to evaluate and improve the sustainability of weed control in reserves in North Shore.

Tuff Crater reserve is a great example of a restored natural area as invasive weeds in some parts of the reserve are reduced to controlled levels. A number of documents provide specific guidance relevant to managing the biodiversity of Tuff Crater (Happy, 2009, p. 4). These are: • The Biosecurity Act 1993. • The Reserves Act 1977. • The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 1994. • The Resource Management Act 1991. • Auckland Regional Pest Management Strategy (2007-2012). 2. 5. 1. Relevant Council Legislation • North Shore City Proposed District Plan (2002). Auckland Regional Policy Statement (1999). • Auckland Regional Plan: Air Land & Water (2004). 2. 5. 2. Prerequisites for a Proposal – Cost Benefit Analysis Three-step process for determining whether a species should be included in a pest management strategy: (Biosecurity Generic Guidelines Group, 2005) 1. Initial screening of candidate pests to determine adverse effects – section 72(1)(c) of the Act; 2. Determining for each pest species whether benefits exceed costs and whether regional intervention will achieve greater results than individual intervention –section 72(1)(a) and (b); 3.

Identifying the exacerbates and beneficiaries in relation to each pest – section 72(1) and also required under section 77. A full report documenting assumptions, screening of pests and Cost Benefit Analysis calculations and conclusions for those species for which they are required, is contained in a separate document “Cost Benefit Analysis and Assumptions, Animal and Plant Species Considered for Inclusion in the Proposed Auckland Regional Pest Management Strategy 2007-2012, a supporting document to satisfy the requirements of section 72 of the Biosecurity Act 1993”. (Auckland Regional Council, 2006, p. 6. ) 2. 5. . Section 72(1)(c) Section 72(1)(c) stipulates that the Council must consider that a species is capable of causing serious harm in terms of: • Economic impacts. • Human health or enjoyment. • Conservation values. • Maori values. • Soil resources or water quality. 3. Method The key indicators for this report that will represent the trends in the reserve are the number and percentage of invasive weeds species. The current characteristic of interest is to identify the presence and abundance of native plants and identify the reserve’s forest condition in areas such as MU7, which is infested with elaeagnus and pampas.

This is achieved by using parameters such as invasive and introduced species presence and abundance. 3. 1. Sampling Methods 3. 1. 1. Plot Procedure The access to the plot and its location was recorded on a map of the Tuff Crater reserve (Knight, nd. ). Plot procedure 20 x 20m sampling method using line transects and quadrats (Allen & Hurst, 2007, p. 21) were applied. In this method, the transect lines are laid out across the area to be surveyed. The sampling unit used was 1 m2 quadrat. The purpose of using a quadrat is to enable comparable samples to be obtained from areas of consistent size and shape.

Inventory populations of weeds were entered on the site on 1 May 2010. Assumptions were made that samples were representative of the habitat in general. The data was recorded on an Excel spread sheet to determine the density of weeds and weed species present. This method was used again on 22 May 2010 to evaluate the effectiveness of the weed management programme done on 8 May 2010. 3. 1. 2. Photo Point Photo points, which are simply periodic photographs of specific range sites, were taken as it is an excellent way of monitoring changes (McGinty & White, nd, p. 2).

Photographs were taken at the same point at several angles to analyse the qualitative assessment of the effect of weed control (Happy, 2009, p. 30) done on 8 May 2010. 3. 2. Controlling Methods Weed identification and understanding the lifecycles are essential in the management of weed population. Weeds may be classified as grasses, broadleaves or sedges and by their lifecycle as annuals, biennials and perennials. Observing the lifecycle of weeds will enable successful application of suppression methods and prevent future spread (Department of Environment and Heritage, Australia, nd, p. 12). 3. 2. 1.

Herbicides Herbicides are important tools for controlling weeds. It is important to understand the effects and limitations of those used for control of noxious weeds. Herbicides are categorized as selective or non-selective. Selective herbicides kill a specific type of plant while non-selective herbicides are not limited by plant type. There are basic principals that need to be address for successful applications. (Montana Weed Control Association, nd) These standard principles are: • Correct herbicide choice for the target weed species of concern. • Accurate timing of herbicide applications. Standard and correct application technique. • Additional site conditions such as soil type slope, existing vegetation (target and non-target plants). Vigilant® gel was used at the site to control elaeagnus, moth plant, gorse, arum, ginger and woolly nightshade. The stems of these weeds near the ground were cut and the gel was painted on the stump. Cut elaeagnus branches from the main tree trunk were painted with gel to prevent re-growth as they were left on site to decompose. 3. 2. 2. Manual Weed Control This is the best method to use for minimal disturbance to soil and native seedlings.

Annuals and weeds with tap roots such as pampas, moth plant, kikuyu and weeds with rhizomatous root system such as wild ginger and climbing asparagus were effectively controlled with hand pulling. This method was used in small areas in MU7 around natives which might get damaged by spraying. Elaeagnus which covered whole cliff sides were successfully removed using manual methods as machines could not be used on steep cliff sides. 4. Result A variety of plant communities were observed in the MU7 area. Vegetation communities composed primarily of non-native plant species in some of the quadrats were identified.

Due to the minimum mapping unit for each vegetation community (20 x 20m), infestations of non-native species are more widespread than presented here. Weeds such as pampas, kikuyu and elaeagnus are abundant at MU7. It was observed that there were dead pampas grass on the 20 x 20m plot due to spraying and mulching in the first quarter of 2010. Pampas grass competes with and smothers other vegetation, creates fire risk and harbours pests such as rabbits, possums and rats. Kikuyu grass almost completely inhibits regeneration of native plant species by smothering seedling and native ground covers.

Results show that during the monitoring phase at the 20 x 20m plot that elaeagnus which covered whole cliff sides (Appendix 1) were successfully controlled using manual methods. Elaeagnus is a dense, vigorous scrambling shrub and the most common, invasive and detrimental species occurring in the MU7. Moth plant, wild ginger, climbing asparagus and arum lily (Zantedeschia aethiopica) were at controlled levels at some areas of MU7. Moth plant can become the dominant species in uncontrolled area, which competes with or replaces native plant species. Wild ginger, also known as kahili ginger, spreads from rhizomes and by birds.

It forms dense colonies smothering native plants and preventing regeneration. Climbing asparagus kills host plants by smothering or ring barking. It is a fast growing rapid coloniser and covers the forest floor preventing re-growth of native seedlings and native ground cover. Arum lily smothers ground cover, preventing regeneration of native flora. All parts of this plant are poisonous to humans, pets and livestock. 4. 1. Result monitoring Result monitoring of this project include: • Changes in the extent and vigour of various weed species in the reserve. • Changes in the extent and vigour of introduced weed species in the reserve. . 2. Outcome monitoring Outcome monitoring of this project would be • Changes in the abundance and condition of native plants. • Changes in the extent and vigour of wetland native plant communities. • Changes and abundance for each salt marsh communities. • Presence and abundance of native animals in the reserve. Data for potential indicators such as relative abundance and distribution of selected indicator species compared to historic and current baseline and the extent of indigenous vegetation compared to historic and current baseline could be stored using the above monitoring results. . 3. Graphs of the weed monitoring The following graphs were created from the spread sheets which were used to enter species density of the 20 x 20m monitoring plot. (Appendix 1) 4. 3. 1. Graph of elaeagnus density in the plot area before the weed control Date: 1 May 2010 [pic] 4. 3. 2. Graph of elaeagnus density in the plot area after the weed control Date: 22 May 2010 [pic] 4. 3. 3. Graph of weed density in the plot area before the weed control Date: 1 May 2010 [pic] 4. 3. 4. Graph of weed density in the plot area after the weed control Date: 22 May 2010 [pic] 5. Conclusions

Auckland’s varied topography, geology and climates have helped to give rise to high levels of weed diversity. Attempts to eradicate widespread weeds are unlikely to be feasible, although there are benefits in controlling these pests in areas of high conservation value. Tuff Crater’s vegetation is one of a four remnants of once broadleaved forest on volcanic tuff crater soils in North Shore (North Shore City, 2005, p. 4). It is vital to protect and enhance the reserve as unique native plants, ecologically significant intertidal mangrove communities and indigenous salt marsh communities are contained within the crater.

Native plant species provide the keystone elements for ecosystem restoration. Native plants help to increase the existing local population of native plant species, providing numerous benefits to indigenous biodiversity. Weed management and control is often a critical component in restoration projects designed to benefit native plants. Identification and monitoring of invasive non-native plant species is vital to any restoration programme. The monitoring performed for this report helps to determine that the weed control work being undertaken is effective to protect the native vegetation and habitats of the reserve.

Notably, during the first quarter of 2010, a successful integrated weed control programme, (Montana Weed Control Association, nd) was conducted which included the use of mowing and spraying to control large amounts of kikuyu grass and spraying and mechanical controls to mulch large amounts of pampas grass. The long-term plan is in progress for Tuff Crater reserve to restore the area to a self sustaining indigenous ecosystem. This will be achieved by ongoing weed management, where areas are systematically prioritised and controlled.

Targeted application of herbicides, mechanical and manual methods are the main approaches used. A native revegetation programme and animal pest control will complement weed control efforts. Adequate processes are in place to achieve the long term plan for the weed control programme of the reserve. Which are: • Reduce and maintain all environmental weed species at low density throughout the reserve. • The resource requirements for weed control work can be minimised in future years. • Ecological processes of regeneration of native plants are unaffected by weed control methods. The indigenous vegetation community remains intact. 6. Recommendations 6. 1. Approaches Weed risk is typically assessed using three criteria: invasiveness, impacts and potential distribution (Anon, 2006). A weed risk assessment (WRA) protocol has been developed based on a series of questions on these criteria (Biosecurity Australia, 2008). Three strategic approaches for long term weed control could be adopted. (Department of Conservation, 2010, p. 24). • The first approach is to prevent weeds known to cause problems in other reserves in the Auckland region.

This could be achieved by an active surveillance programme before the weeds are widely dispersed. Controlling potential invasive weeds at the time of establishment is the most cost effective weed control approach available. • The second approach is to deal with weeds that are already widely spread in the region but only just establishing in the reserve. This could be effective to control and to maintain the high-quality habitats that still remain in the reserve. • The last approach is to remove dense infestations of weeds at targeted locations to protect important native plants.

There might be potential unintended impacts on native plants and animals with the widespread use of herbicide and machinery. Re-vegetation should be a component of when using weed control method. The site condition is a critical factor in the success of a restoration project. Important characteristics to consider includes: (Dorner Jeanette, nd, p. 9). • Soils. o history of residual herbicide and/or pesticides. • Topography. • Hydrology. • Existing ecological communities. o presence of exotic plant species. o abundance or lack of native plant species. • Disturbances. • Climate and microclimate.

Native plants which are found on site should be the species that should probably be included in the restoration plan. In addition to a plant survey, a wildlife survey can be useful to determine what is already present at the site. It can indicate type of habitat already exists at the site and type of habitat modifications which might be useful to the native wildlife already present. When choosing a ground cover specifically for weed control, it is important to consider the site conditions. Native grasses are a good choice as ground covers for tough, weed-prone areas.

Some of these grasses have deep root systems and are good for erosion control. They can sustain poor soils, tolerate excessive sun and survive with minimal rain falls. 6. 2. Data entry, verification and editing Data entry involves transporting raw data from field sheets into an electronic form such as Excel. Introduced species diversity and abundance data could be stored in a database. This could be used to store detailed information of these indicators including trend analysis, data summaries and statistical analyses (Harding, McGilvray & Beames, 2009, p. 11).

Geographical Information Systems (GIS) such as ArcMap9 and ArcGIS captures, stores, and analyzes spatial data that are linked to locations. GIS will enhance information on the Tuff Creator reserve. GIS technology improves scientific investigations and resource management of New Zealand’s natural ecosystems and indigenous biodiversity. The Global Positioning System (GPS) points for quadrat and transects locations could be entered into the databases and converted into a GIS layer for storage of shapefiles, metadata and spatial data for ongoing monitoring. 6. 3.

Recommendations for routine data summaries and statistical analyses to detect change. The data summaries and statistical analyses must be easily interpretable, complete and accurate, should describe the current condition of the reserve and robust enough to detect habitat changes over time (Harding, McGilvray & Beames, 2009, p. 12). Data summaries and statistical analyses need to detail information regarding native and introduced species diversity. Data summaries should be undertaken at the end of each monitoring occasion, given that monitoring is recommended at lengthy intervals on a long term basis.

Any management interventions that may influence these indicators need to be noted in the data summaries. 6. 4. Recommended reporting schedule. Selecting areas that truly represent the range site as a whole is critical to an effective long term monitoring program. (McGinty & White, nd, p. 3). Permanent plot sampling (20 x 20m) is a highly versatile approach, (Allen & Hurst, 2007, p. 7) providing information on densities, associations and indirect evidence on a variety of community. The Transect Method even though most time consuming, are most efficient to record plants on a percent coverage or the total number observed.

Plot sampling using Transect Method has the advantage of transcending down through a range of micro-habitats within the plot covered and gathers a much greater diversity of species (Telluride Institute, 2007, p. 6). Photo points provide a method to monitor plots with a minimum of time and expense. Photographs that best illustrate the situation should be taken at least once a year and at the same time each year. Photographs and detailed notes on the same location (using distance from a highly visible landmark or GPS coordinates) over time can be analysed for changes.

This allows a qualitative assessment of the effects of weed control on weed infestation and natural regeneration (Happy, 2009, p. 38). Photographs, notes and interpretations serve as a permanent record of each situation for future consideration. Extensive summary reports, including trend analysis, should be completed every four or five years depending on the rate of change in the monitoring data and the need for summary information to guide resource management. A stronger focus on long term monitoring is essential and provides insight to natural or human-induced vegetation dynamics.

This would be impossible if data were only available from one-off vegetation surveys or short term monitoring programmes. Long term monitoring data can provide a baseline from which future unforeseen changes can be assessed. (Allen & Hurst, 2007, p. 6) 7. Acknowledgements Anne Denny, Forest & Bird, North Shore. Richard Hursthouse, Forest & Bird, North Shore. Jackie Knight, Kaipatiki Project. 8. References Allen, R. B. , & Hurst, J. M. (2007). A Permanent Plot Method for Monitoring Indigenous Forest-Expanded Manual. Version 4.

Report for Landcare Research. Retrieved from http://nvs. landcareresearch. co. nz/html/PermanentPlot_ExpandedManual. pdf Anon. (2006). ‘HB 294-2006 National Post-Border Weed Risk Management Protocol. ’(CRC Australian Weed Management Adelaide, and Standards Australia and New Zealand: Sydney) Auckland Regional Council. (2002). Auckland Regional Pest Management Strategy 2002-2007. Retrieved from http://www. arc. govt. nz/albany/fms/main/Documents/Environment/Plants%20and%20animals/pest%20management%20strategy. pdf Auckland Regional Council. (2006).

Regional Pest Strategy 2007–2012 (RPMS). Retrieved from http://www. arc. govt. nz/albany/fms/main/Documents/Environment/Plants%20and%20animals/RPMS/RPMS%20Part%20I%20Introduction%20and%20Background. pdf Australian Government, Biosecurity Australia. (2008). Development of the weed risk assessment system. Retrieved from http://www. daff. gov. au/ba/reviews/weeds/development Biosecurity Generic Guidelines Group. (2005). A Guide to Reviewing Regional Pest Management Strategies. A report prepared on behalf of regional councils. Report for Regional Council.

Retrieved from http://www. arc. govt. nz/albany/fms/main/Documents/Environment/Plants%20and%20animals/RPMS/RPMS%20Part%20I%20Introduction%20and%20Background. pdf Denny, A. (2008). Habitat. Tuff Crater – past, present and future. Report for Forest and Bird North Shore. Retrieved from http://www. forestandbird. org. nz/files/publication_attachments/nthshr_habitat_apr_aug08. pdf Department of Conservation, New Zealand. (2010). River life: braided rivers in the MacKenzie Basin teaching resource – Weed control. Retrieved from http://www. doc. govt. z/upload/documents/getting-involved/students-and-teachers/themes/river-life/river-life-teaching-resource. pdf Department of Environment and Heritage, Australia. (nd). Introductory Weed Management Manual. Retrieved from http://www. southgippslandweeds. com. au/files/file/Weed_management_manual. pdf Dorner, J. (nd). An introduction to using native plants in restoration projects. Report for University of Washington. Retrieved From http://www. fs. fed. us/wildflowers/nativeplantmaterials/documents/intronatplant. pdf Google Maps, Tuff Creator Reserve Retrieved From Harding, C. , McGilvray A. Beames, L. (2009). Biodiversity Monitoring Protocol Monitoring the Effectiveness of Weed Control in Dampier Peninsula Vine Thickets Threatened Ecological Community. Report for Department of Environment and Conservation, Australia. Retrieved From http://www. dec. wa. gov. au/index. php? option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=3920&Itemid=1 Happy, S. (2009). Forest and Bird North Shore Branch Restoration Plan for Tuff Crater and Heath Reserve. Report for Forest and Bird, North Shore. Retrieved from   http://www. forestandbird. org. nz/files/file/Tuff%20Crater%20Restoration%20Plan. pdf

Knight, J. A. (nd). Tuff Crater Restoration Project, Site plan existing PDF. Report for Forest and Bird, North Shore. Retrieved from http://www. forestandbird. org. nz/what-we-do/branches/north-shore/projects/tuff-crater-restoration-project McGinty, A. , & White, L. (nd). Texas Agricultural extension Service Range Monitoring with Photo Points Retrieved from http://texashelp. tamu. edu/005-agriculture/pdf/l-5216-09-98-range-monitoring-with-photo-points. pdf Montana Weed Control Association (nd). Herbicide Weed Control. Retrieved from http://www. mtweed. org/chemical-herbicide-weed-control/

North Shore City. (2005). A Survey of Sites of Ecological Significance in Tamaki and Rodney Ecological Districts. Retrieved from http://www. northshorecity. govt. nz/Services/Environment/EcologicalStudy/Documents/ecological-survey-strategic-management-report. pdf Shadforth, G. (nd). Report for Royal Botanic Gardens, Melbourne. Alien Invaders: Learning about Biodiversity by Monitoring Environmental Weeds. Retrieved from http://www. bgci. org/education/1647/ Telluride Institute, (2007). Comparison of Vegetation Monitoring Technique. Retrieved from http://www. ellurideinstitute. org/media/uploads/Comparison_Vegetation_Monitoring_Techniques. pdf 9. Appendices Appendix 1: Weeds species observed on some of the transect lines at Tuff Crater on 1/05/2010. | | | | | |Species |Common Name |Abundance |RPMS Designation | |  |  |  |(ARC, 2007) | |Cortaderia sp. pampas |Abundant |Surveillance (Surv. ) | |Crataegus |monogyna hawthorn |Abundant |Surveillance | |Elaeagnus x reflexa |elaeagnus |Abundant |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Ligustrum lucidum |tree privet |Abundant |Surv. Community Initiative | |Ligustrum sinense |Chinese privet |Abundant |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Pennisetum clandestinum |kikuyu |Abundant |  | |Tradescantia fluminensis |wandering Jew |Abundant |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Agapanthus praecox |agapanthus |Common |Surv. |Araujia hortorum |moth plant |Common |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Convolvulus sp. |convolvulus |Common |  | |Crocosmia x |montbretia |Common |Surveillance | |crocosmiiflora |milkweeds |Common |  | |Euphorbia sp.   |  |  | |Cotoneaster glaucophyllus |cotoneaster |Common |Surveillance | |Cyperus eragostis |umbrella sedge |Common |  | |Daucus carota |wild carrot |Common | | |Geranium sp. geranium |Common |  | |Lonicera japonica |Japanese honeysuckle |Common |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Oxalis sp. |wood sorrel, oxalis |Common |  | |Paraserianthes lophantha |brush wattle |Common |Surveillance | |Plantago spp. plantain |Common |  | |Ranunculus sp. |buttercup |Common |  | |Rumex obtusifolius |broad-leaved dock |Common |  | |Salix cinerea |grey willow |Common |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Salix fragilis |crack willow |Common |Surv. Community Initiative | |Solanum mauritianum |woolly nightshade |Common |Community Initiative | |Syzygium smithii |monkey apple, lily |Common |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Tropaeolum majus |nasturtium |Common |  | |Zantedeschia aethiopica |arum lily |Common |Surveillance | Species |Common Name |Abundance |RPMS Designation | |  |  |  |(ARC, 2007) | |Acacia longifolia |sydney golden wattle |Rare |  | |Allium triquetrum |onion weed |Rare |  | |Alnus glutinosa |alder |Rare |  | |Alocasia brisbanensis |elephant’s ear |Rare |Surveillance (Surv. ) | |Asimina sp. paw paw |Rare | | |Asparagus asparagoides |smilax, bridal creeper |Rare |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Asparagus scandens |climbing asparagus |Rare |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Banksia integrifolia |coastal banksia |Rare |Surv. | |Betula sp. |birch |Rare |  | |Buddleja davidii buddleia |butterfly bush |Rare |Surveillance | |Callistemon sp. bottle brush |Rare |  | |Cestrum nocturnum # |Queen of the night |Rare |  | |Chrysanthemoides monilifera |boneseed |Rare |Surveillance | |Cirsium vulgare |scotch/spear thistle |Rare |  | |Cupressus macrocarpa |Cupressus macrocarpa |Rare |  | |Cyperus involucratus |umbrella sedge |Rare |  | |Erythrina xsykesii |flame tree, coral tree |Rare |  | |Fatsia japonica fatsi |Japanese aralia |Rare |  | |Ficus macrophylla # |Morton Bay fig |Rare |  | |Ficus sp. |fig tree |Rare |  | |Hedychium flavescens |yellow ginger |Rare |Surv. Community Initiative | |Helminthotheca echioides |ox-tongue |Rare |  | |Homalanthus populifolius |Queensland poplar |Rare |Surveillance | |Kniphofia uvaria |red-hot poker, torch lily |Rare |  | |Macadamia sp. |macadamia |Rare | | |Malus domestica |apple |Rare |  | |Monstera deliciosa |fruit salad plant |Rare |  | |Nandina domestica |nandina, sacred |Rare |  | |Phoenix sp. |phoenix palm |Rare |Surveillance. | |Passiflora mollisima |banana passionfruit |Rare |Surv. Community Initiative | |Polygala myrtfolia |sweet pea shrub |Rare |Surveillance | |Prunus campanulata # |Taiwanese cherry |Rare |  | |Rhododendron sp. |rhododendron |Rare |  | |Rumex sp. |dock species |Rare |  | |Salix babylonica ** |weeping willows |Rare |  | |Salix matsudana ‘Tortuosa’ |tortured willow, curly willow |Rare |  | |Setaria palmifolia |palm grass |Rare |Surv. Community Initiative | |Solanum nigrum |black nightshade |Rare |  | |Tetrapanax papyriferus | rice-paper plant/palm |Rare |  | |Trachycarpus fortunei # |Chinese windmill palm |Rare |  | |Verbena bonariensis |status, purple top |Rare |  | |Vinca major |periwinkle |Rare |Surveillance | |Species |Common Name |Abundance |RPMS Designation | |  |  |  |(ARC, 2007) | |Ageratina adenophora Mexican devil |Localised |  | |Apium nodiflorum |water celery |Localised |  | |Arundaria sp |bamboo |Localised |  | |Arundo donax |giant reed |Localised |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Bambusa sp. |bamboo |Localised |  | |Calystegia silvatica convolvulus |giant bindweed |Localised |  | |Canna sp. |canna lily |Localised |  | |Chlorophytum sp. |spider plant |Localised |  | |Crassula multicava |fairy crassula |Localised |Surveillance | |Escallonia sp. escallonia |Localised |  | |Eucalyptus sp. ** |eucalyptus |Localised |  | |Fallopia convolvulus |cornbind |Localised |  | |Gallium aparine |cleavers |Localised |  | |Hedera helix |English ivy |Localised |Surveillance | |Hedychium gardnerianum |Kahili ginger |Localised |Surv. Community Initiative | |Impatiens sp. | impatience, dizzy lizzie |Localised |  | |Impatiens sodenii | shrub balsam |Localised |  | |Jasminum polyanthum | jasmine |Localised |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Lotus pedunculatus | lotus | Localised |  | |Mentha sp. | mint | Localised |  | |Myosotis sp. | forget-me-not | Localised | |Nasturtium officinale | watercress | Localised |  | |Nephrolepis cordifolia |tuber ladder fern | Localised |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Osteospermum fruticosum |dimorphotheca | Localised |  | |Paspalum distichum |water couch, knot grass | Localised |  | |Persicaria sp. |polygonum | Localised |  | |Plectranthus ciliatus |blue spur flower | Localised |Surveillance | |Poplulus sp. poplar | Localised |  | |Pseudosasa japonica | bamboo | Localised |  | |Rosa sp. | rose | Localised |  | |Rubus fruticosus agg. | blackberry | Localised |Surveillance | |Rubus sp. | berry | Localised |  | |Senecio angulatus | Cape ivy | Localised |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Senecio mikanioides |German ivy | Localised |Surv. Community Initiative | |Soliva sessilis |Onehunga weed | Localised |  | |Thunbergia elata |black-eyed susan | Localised |  | |Ulex europaeus | gorse | Localised |Surv. , Community Initiative | |Vicia sativa | vetch | Localised |  | |Watsonia bulbillifera | watsonia | Localised |  |

Post Author: admin

x

Hi!
I'm Antonia!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out