(Section 23 of the RPS)

Northland supports a wide variety of natural areas, including indigenous forests and shrublands, wetlands, rivers, lakes, streams, dunelands, coastal and marine habitats. The diversity of plant and animal species and communities contained in each of these contributes to the unique biodiversity of Northland.

There has been a significant reduction in the area of freshwater wetlands and indigenous forest. Because of this, many of the indigenous species dependent on these habitats are now considered to be threatened. Northland has amongst the highest numbers of threatened species of any region in the country.

The objectives, policies and methods contained in this chapter are aimed principally at protecting areas of significant indigenous vegetation, and significant habitats of indigenous fauna within the region.

Anticipated Outcomes

· An increase in the areas of significant indigenous vegetation and the significant habitats of indigenous fauna which are formally protected.

· No significant increase in the number of threatened species in the region.

Policy Mix

The objectives for the ecosystems and biodiversity section are:

· maintenance of the biodiversity of the Northland region;

· protection of the life supporting capacity of ecosystems through avoiding, remedying or mitigating (in that order of priority) the adverse effects of activities, substances and introduced species on the functioning of natural ecosystems;

· protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and the significant habitats of indigenous fauna.

The roles of the Department of Conservation, NRC and district councils overlap, and where possible initiatives are co-ordinated, while allowing each agency the flexibility to utilise the range of regulatory mechanisms available to them. In addition, these agencies all have a role in advocating a range of voluntary methods available for the protection of important ecological areas.

The Ecosystems and Biodiversity section contains nine individual methods of implementation that flow from the policy direction discussed above.

What's the Current State?

· Remaining natural habitat areas are small and fragmented. This increases the pressures from surrounding land uses. Approximately 22% of the Northland region remains in indigenous forest.

· Only 5% of the original coastal/freshwater wetlands remain.

· There are over 100 threatened plant and animal species in the Northland region. This is greater than any other region in New Zealand.

· Between 2006 and early 2009, the main increase in land protection in Northland has been through QEII National Trust Covenants. In July 2006, there were 365 registered covenants and a further 98 approved or 7315ha protected. By March 2009, there were 518 registered and 59 approved for 8864ha, which is an increase of 1549ha. Approximately 14% of the Northland region has some sort of legal protection.

· Northland has 23,202 hectares (about 2% of the region) of nationally significant indigenous vegetation remaining that is not legally protected. Over half of this is located in the Far North district.

What has worked well in this section?

The non-statutory approaches to biodiversity management are working well. The Northland Biodiversity Enhancement Group (NBEG) is a good example of inter-agency co-operation on an informal level and there are over 50 active environmental land care groups in the region. Northland has also seen a significant increase in council funds available such as the Environment Fund (NRC) and the Significant Natural Areas fund (Far North District Council). Whangarei District Council and Kaipara District Council also have funds available.

The NRC is making progress with identification of the best wetlands across the region. More ecological districts have now been surveyed and most of the 19 ecological districts have published reports. In addition, there are a large number of landowners carrying out active biosecurity management and biodiversity enhancement on their properties throughout Northland.

What has not worked in this section?

The identification of biodiversity values is happening very slowly. Sites of Significant Biological Interest (SSBI) are not yet identified across the region. The sharing of information is not always consistent between agencies. There are few rules in the regional plans to protect biodiversity, because of a lack of clear statutory role for NRC in this regard when the plans were developed.

The protection of individual native trees (such as Pohutakawa) has not worked well.

Northland continues to lose significant indigenous wetland through human activities such as land drainage. The NRC is currently completing a database of significant indigenous wetlands and is anticipated this will assist in the analysis of the severity of the loss of significant indigenous wetlands over time. The database will also assist in identifying and protecting the existing significant indigenous wetlands.

General comments on this section:

This section has not been well implemented, for example, SSBI's have not been mapped.

There is a need to ensure this section is integrated with the regional pest management strategies.

Experience has shown that changing attitudes in landowners is best achieved by one-on-one interaction and this is a significant challenge for the implementation of regional policies within the RPS.

While significant information gaps surrounding what we've got are currently being filled, this information now needs to be used to strategically prioritise how to manage what we have left.

Is this section Efficient and Effective?

While many methods are being implemented, and there is good communication and co-ordination at an informal level, the efficiency of this section could be increased further through more formal co-ordination arrangements with agencies involved in managing the land resource, particularly the NRC, district councils and the Department of Conservation.

Statutory biodiversity protection has not been implemented well to date by the NRC – one reason for this is that it was not a primary role for regional councils prior to the 2005 RMA amendments.

While the Environment Fund is working effectively and is always oversubscribed, it has traditionally not been strategically targeted and could be more effective if aligned with the strategic priorities for environmental management such as water quality and the most significant wetlands.

Emerging Issues for this section?

This section should consider developing policy support and priority for the "Whole of Northland approach to Biodiversity" project currently being developed. This should include policy direction on NRC being the lead agency for the development of a biodiversity database.

Changes to the RMA (section 30(ga)) introduces new responsibilities for biodiversity for the NRC and district councils. This section of the RPS needs to be updated to reflect this. However there is a need to be careful to ensure that the resources are available to support any new approaches and there is a balance between the cost of policy development, research and data management with real outcome expenditure.

Policy direction is required to bridge the gap between ecological areas, and promote the restoration of ecological corridors. The value of ecosystems and biodiversity for cultural practices, such as medicinal and weaving plants may need to be linked into this section.

The impacts of climate change for the Northland region and its effects on biodiversity including the potential for Northland to be more conducive to pest species establishing themselves needs to be considered.

Conclusions

Biodiversity management within Northland has good informal networks and co-ordination but does not have the same at the formal strategic level, particularly between local authorities and the department of conservation. The RPS needs to be updated to reflect the 2005 RMA amendments and provide clear priority, direction and guidance on coordination of roles and responsibilities between local authorities. Key areas to focus on into the future could include the provision of incentives for land owners to protect and enhance biodiversity, further education (including the promotion of the true value of biodiversity), coordination of incentive schemes such as the Environment Fund and the comprehensive management of invasive pest species.