New MoE wetland definition and will it mean Pukeko, Paras, W/F Herons should be declared AT RISK species?

[andrewcrossland]

Hi Team,

Many years ago NZ signed up to the Ramsar Convention on "Wetlands of International Importance, especially as waterfowl habitat". And the definition "wetlands" under this convention includes "wet grasslands" as well as "human-made sites". As part of it's obligations, the NZ Government agreed to practise "wise-use of wetlands".

The world over, decision-makers, scientists and communities recognise that wet grasslands are really important to many wetland birds, even when they are modified and comprise exotic grass species. Its also recognised that the low sward height maintained by grazing or seasonal mowing in some wet grasslands is a habitat structure preferred by many waders and waterfowl and is favoured by many of these species over tall swampland for example.

But in NZ there seems to be a fixation with natural "tall wetlands" - kahikatea forest, flax, raupo, carex, etc. And thinking here seems to be primarily focused on botanical assessments of wetlands, followed by hydrological assessments, and then by an assumption that "if there's trees, then the birds will come"..... Very few of the key scientists and decsion-makers around the study of "wetlands" in this country seem to understand that a surface water pond in a paddock, or exposed muddy substrate (such as scraped ground or a ploughed paddock) are actually "wetlands" too from the perspective of many bird species. And the whole assumption that if you protect plant communities you'll be protecting the habitat of bird communities in a nice neat fully encompassing overlap, seems be prevailing thought.

BUT - How many of you intuitively know that after a lot of rain, the interesting places to look for flocks of wetland birds is not on rivers and lakes, but on temporary surface water ponding and saturated pasture in farmland? And how many also intuitively know that more species are supported for nesting and feeding on ephmeral ponds and muddy patches on farmland, than on the patch of tall raupo or carex swamp down the road??

Well, if you've noticed that too, then you might want to send a bit of feedback to the Government (Ministry of the Environment) as they're proposing to remove these habitats from the defintion of wetlands...

This is presumably partly because they have a mindset that wetlands are measured by their percentage composition of indigenous vegetation (>50%) and not on other factors like the underlying landform, hydrology and use by birds. The other reason ofcourse (and the worry for the birds) is that this makes it so much easier for landowners to "improve" their land by getting rid of that ephemeral ponding, that wet grassland, that boggy patch in the paddock, etc, if those habitats have >50% exotic vegetation cover - which virtually all wet bits in paddocks over much of the country do (esp in the eastern and southern SI and in eastern NI).

The unintended consequence is that this is likely to detrimentally impact a bunch of "common" native bird species that have chunks of their populations dependant on these <50% native/>50% exotic grasslands and associated ephemeral habitats for key stages in their annual lifecycles - think Pukeko, Paradise Shelduck, White-faced Heron, SIPO, Grey Teal, Pied Stilt,etc.

The request for feedback document says:(file:///C:/Users/andre/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/1QGFJYFQ/managing-our-wetlands-discussion-document.pdf)

"To better achieve the original intent of the regulations the Government is proposing to amend
the definition of ‘natural wetland’.

THE NPS-FM CURRENTLY DEFINES A ‘NATURAL WETLAND’ AS:

... a wetland (as defined in the Act [RMA]) that is not:
(a) a wetland constructed by artificial means (unless it was constructed to offset
impacts on, or restore, an existing or former ‘natural wetland’); or
(b) a geothermal wetland; or
(c) any area of improved pasture that, at the commencement date, is dominated by
(that is more than 50% of) exotic pasture species and is subject to temporary rainderived water pooling".

They are proposing to modify (C) to say:

"any area of pasture that has more than 50 percent ground cover comprising exotic pasture species or exotic species associated with
pasture".

This proposed new defintion is narrowly focused on a botanical composition view of what a wetland is and ignores the fact that a natural wetland through a process of exotic plant invasion or through the efforts of human agency can convert into something that still has the charcteristics of being "wet", "muddy" and "supports native wetland birds", BUT, comprises >50% exotic vegetation. It potentially leads the way to "improving" wet parts of farmland that are not dominated by indigenous vegetation, and thereby removing those habitats that have meant some of our wetland-loving native birds have until now been commonplace in NZ's highly modified countryside - the Puks, Paras, Stilts, Spur-wings, SIPO, Black-billed Gulls, W/F Herons, Harriers, and the like.

Anyway, the MoE are asking for submissions. Hopefully this post will encourage a few ornithologists to write something so there's a bit of balance and "habitat for wetland birds" can be seen as a measure to define wetlands as much as a "habitat for plants" already does.

[andrewcrossland]

will fix typos shortly!

[AngryBird45]

I made a post about this on Facebook to help: https://www.facebook.com/paradisesheldu ... 164363405/

[Paul Shortis]

Morning Andrew

You raise an important issue and state it eloquently. Wetlands are extremely important and, in typical human fashion, we are attempting to define them and then decide what is in and what is out of favour and support. In doing that, by definition, we create winners and losers and the impact is eventually felt by the birds dependent on these environments. I have taken the liberty of passing your piece onto a couple of national bodies who are preparing submissions.

Thanks for prompting my thinking!