Freshwater Protected Area Resourcbook

5.8 Inventories in New Zealand

– a note by Kevin Collier¹¹⁹

1. Several classifications for freshwater ecosystems have been proposed in NZ, and an integrative one was proposed by Ward & Lambie 2000 - as yet untested (see www.smf.govt.nz/results/5072_final.pdf). NZ Reference: Ward, J C and Lambie, J S (2000) Monitoring changes in wetland extent: an environmental performance indicator for wetlands. Final report project phase 1. Lincoln Environmental, Lincoln.

2. There are a couple of NZ wetland inventories but they are not comprehensive. The Wetland Resource Inventory (WERI) database is run by the Department of Conservation, but is now probably out of date.
Cromarty (1996) compiled a list of wetlands in NZ that met the Ramsar criteria.
NZ Reference: Cromarty, P (compiler) (1996) A directory of wetlands in New Zealand. Department of Conservation, Wellington.
3. The River Environment Classification provides a powerful tool for mapping stream/river types and their condition (Snelder et al. 2002). http://www.niwa.co.nz/ncwr/tools
4. Most regional councils undertake State of the Environment reporting on a regional basis, and the Ministry for the Environment prepares a national overview (see http://www.mfe.govt.nz/monitoring/index.htm for further details).
5. Not much known about the biota of groundwaters or springs in NZ. While there is some understanding of the hydrogeology and water chemistry of many of groundwater aquifer types, there is little or no information on the biological resources held in these aquifers. That significant biodiversity exists in these systems is assured given research in overseas systems, and some limited research already carried out in sedimentary aquifers in New Zealand. Much of our groundwater resource is currently managed purely as a sustainable resource for human needs, with little or no regard paid to other dependent ecosystems.
6. Various schedules of protected waters, and wild and scenic rivers have been produced in NZ but these generally placed only minor emphasis on natural heritage values.
NZ References:

Grindell, D S and Guest, P A (1986) A list of rivers and lakes deserving inclusion in a Schedule of Protected Waters: report of the Protected Waters Assessment Committee. Water & Soil Miscellaneous Publication no. 97, Water & Soil Directorate, Ministry of Works and Development, Wellington.

Grindell D S (1984) A national inventory of wild and scenic rivers. Water & Soil Miscellaneous Publication No. 68. Water & Soil Directorate, Ministry of Works and Development, Wellington.
7. There have been recent developments of lake condition indices in NZ. Burns et.al. (1999) developed the Trophic Level Index (TLI) based on concentrations of chlorophyll A, total phosphorus and nitrogen, and Secchi index and dissolved oxygen depletion rate. The TLI can be used to determine lake trophic status and to monitor trends over time; it ranges from 2 for oligotrophic lakes to 7 for supertrophic lakes.
Subsequently, Clayton et al. (2002) have developed LakeSPI, a management tool that uses Submerged Plant Indicators (SPI) for assessing the ecological condition of New Zealand lakes and for monitoring trends in lake ecological condition. Champion et.al. (2002) used another method to generate an Index of Biological Importance (IBI) for 33 Northland lakes based on submerged macrophytes, measuring diversity, vegetation cover, presence of alien species, and the bottom limit of plant distribution.
NZ References:
Burns, N M, Rutherford, J C, Clayton, J S (1999) A monitoring and classification system for New Zealand lakes and reservoirs. Journal of Lake and Reservoir Management (15) 255-271.
Champion, P D, Dugdale, T, Taumoepeau, A (2002) The aquatic vegetation of 33 Northland lakes. NIWA client report NRC01203, February 2002. NIWA, Hamilton.
Clayton, J, Edwards, T, and Froude, V (2002) LakeSPI: A method for monitoring ecological condition in New Zealand Lakes. Technical Report, Version One, NIWA Client Report, HAM2002-011. NIWA, Hamilton. 81pp.

5.9 Recommendations regarding inventory development:

All States need to take major steps to improve inventories in the interests of the sustainable management of natural values. The Commonwealth needs to provide additional focussed funding, particularly where opportunities exist to assist efforts to develop coordinated national approaches to inventory preparation and dissemination.
Consistency of approach across different States is an area where considerable improvements could be made – for example in relation to the collection and storage of ecosystem attribute data. Such data, collected and stored free of a particular classification system, would allow jurisdictions to pursue their own classification approaches, while also supporting the later development of a national classification system for wetlands, rivers and aquifers based directly on a data set of nationally consistent attributes. In this regard the wetland mapping program adopted in the Queensland Wetlands Inventory may offer a useful model, particularly with regard to data handling and inventory protocols. The Queensland classification model used in the Inventory embodies nested hierarchies, in some ways similar to other approaches both within Australia and overseas (see references by Blackman).
It is crucial that, as inventories develop, value and condition data be incorporated. This information is needed to support other decision frameworks – related to development planning and sustainable resource management programs. Public access to inventory data is an area where most jurisdictions could make significant improvements.
Condition indices are another example where there is room for improvement. The Victorian Index of Stream Condition (ISC) has become widely used, and has prompted developments which may see a national approach to the measurement of stream condition. Having progressed the issue with rivers, research now needs to be put into developing indices applicable to different types of wetland and subterranean ecosystem.
We also need to move towards a rural culture which considers catchments and bioregions as fundamental frameworks guiding local decision-making. We also need an urban culture comfortable with paying rural communities for the maintenance of ecosystem values and services¹²⁰. Hopefully (over the next few years) motorists will start to see creek crossings labelled, not only with their catchment, but with their bioregion as well.

Figure 3

Classification used by Queensland Wetland Inventory.