ARTICLE : 2004 EVENING MEETING REPORTS

 Monday 17 May 2004 :   Members’ evening.

The April Newsletter urged members “to share slides or photographs of recent trips” with others at this annual event.   After the Newsletter was posted, it struck me that members who are artists, others who have favourite botanical texts, and others who have plants to display, should be asked to contribute to the interest of the evening.   The result was a wonderfully varied range of presentations.   We thank:
• Eleanor Burton: pen-and-ink and coloured pencil drawings; watercolour paintings of native plants.
• Rae Collins: reading about observations by the botanist George Forster in Dusky Bay in 1773.
• Arnold Dench: reading about the work of the botanist David Monro (1813–1877).
• Arnold and Ruth Dench: threatened plants of the daisy family, e.g. edelweiss, and an edelweiss / vegetable sheep hybrid.
• Bryan Halliday: paintings of native plants.
• Dave Holey: montage of photographs of northern and southern rata in the lower Hutt Valley.
• Chris Horne: slides taken on field trips.
• Andy Malone: slides of vegetation and wildlife on the Auckland Islands.
• Barbara Mitcalfe: slides taken on field trips.
• Julia Stace: slides taken on New Year’s field trip; montage of photographs of weeding on Raoul Island, Kermadecs.

All in all, a thoroughly enjoyable evening!   We plan to a similar programme at the members’ evening in 2005, and look forward to a bigger attendance that the nineteen who were present at this one.   Please plan to attend!

Chris Horne

 Monday 21 June 2004 :   Menacing, munching moths – Protecting NZ from invasive moths.

Speaker Kevin Hackwell, Conservation Manager for the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, stepped in at the last minute for the scheduled speaker Geoff Keey, the F & B Biosecurity Awareness Officer.

While the talk was nominally on the stated topic of recent incursions of invasive moths and what is being done about them, Kevin wished to focus those in attendance on the issues of biosecurity and the threats imposed.   Biosecurity was NZs biggest conservation challenge – how well are we doing?

Kevin referred to an earlier publication the he co-authored, “Pest and Weeds Blueprint for action” published on 1999, that calculated that biosecurity cost $450 million per annum plus another 400million per annum to eliminate the results of incursions.   This amounted to 1% of NZ’s GDP.

The challengers for biosecurity were to : –
• Strengthening the boarders,
• Transferring the cost from the community (tax payer) to the importers,
• Improve surveillance,
• Maintain public support for eradication programmes.

By far the greatest biosecurity pathway risk is sea containers.   The last decade as seen a 180% increase in sea container usage and in shipping voyages.   Biosecurity measures have failed to keep pace with this increase in containerisation.   A MAF review during 2003 of sea container biosecurity has revealed major problems with the current inspection regime.   The practice has been to only visually inspect four external sides at the port and then inspect the interior at the end destination yard by loosely accredited inspectors being employees of the importer.   MAF’s capacity to inspect containers is limited to a small sample.   F & B campaigned for all six sides to be inspected (after all the top and bottom were the most likely places where pests would hide) and for all containers to be inspected along with tighter inspector accreditation and independent inspectors.   Often biosecurity incursion alerts are reported by wharf employees or members of the publics who are the real ears and eyes for biosecurity surveillance.   Only through public awareness and education is this support possible.

What then of the recent moth invasion threats.
• Painted Apple moth (Teia anartoides) – native of Australia where it is a minor pest.   In NZ known to eat over 25 native tree species – discovered in west Auckland in mid-1999.

Painted Apple Moth caterpillar.

Interestingly a MAF public survey during the painted apple moth spraying campaign identified a strong public support for protection against the impact on indigenous flora and fauna.   But historically MAFs major interest has been the protection of commercial horticulture and not indigenous flora.

Another Issue highlighted by Kevin was the capacity of the science fraternity.   Public good science capacity has been greatly depleted over the years with constant restructuring constraints and the wooing of scientists overseas.   This then begged the questions …
• Are there enough quality people to identify pest species?
• Are there enough quality people to identify biosecurity risks?
• What determines the dividing line between a particular sea container being a high risk or low risk?   Today this decision is made based on the capacity to undertake inspections.

While NZ has had so far a reasonably good record for biosecurity protection a number of incursions have only been stopped through good luck rather than good management.   There is still much more we must do if NZ is going to keep out invasive pests.   Kevin posed some practical suggestions : –
• Require containers are not load in the open at night under spotlights – this only serves to attract moths,
• Require containers to be loaded on hard surfaces – not dirt surfaces,
• Treat containers on the outside and provide a persistent insecticide pad on the inside of every container at point of closure,
• Join with Australia to station biosecurity officers in key high risk countries – to provide intelligence and to assist those countries to develop their own biosecurity service,
• Station biosecurity officers in high risk cargo vessels from high risk areas,
• Actively involve the public – use specialist organisation – to be the eyes and ears beyond the port,
• Provide a welcoming no charge pest identification service.

Continued trade liberalisation is also posing further treats; e.g. currently NZ maintains positive threat country lists – countries have to prove that they are pest free; however, the WTO is campaigning for a negative country list regime.

The government agency for biosecurity is MAF whose traditional focus has been on economic security sand not indigenous security and public attitudes.   This is slowly changing but there is still a greater need to engage with the public.   On suggestion Kevin had was to perhaps engage the public in mapping pest weeds in their own gardens and in the possible roll of expert organisations like the Wellington Botanical Society to assist the public with pest plant identification.

F & B is part of a NGO forum with MAF on biosecurity issues and is one of the few NZ conservation organisations to have the resource and expertise available through an appointed part time position of biosecurity officer.

We thank Kevin for stepping in at the last moment and bring this interesting and thought provoking presentation to us.

Further References:
For further information on pests and diseases affecting our forests see the MAF biosecurity site here.
For further information on Forest and Bird submissions on sea containers see the F & B biosecurity site here.

Richard Herbert

 Monday 19 July 2004 :   Environmental Weeds, Wellington Region.

Greater Wellington Region and Local Territorial Authorities.

Speaker Mark McAlpine, Biosecurity Officer (Pest Plants), Greater Wellington the Regional Council, stepped in for the scheduled speaker, Mike Urlich.

Mark first outlined the current staffing for the Biosecurity Division of GW.   The staff in the Pest Plants section are : –
• Mike Urlich (Kapiti Coast District and Porirua City area),
• Mark McAlpine (Upper Hutt and Lower Hutt City areas),
• Robert Quan (Wellington City),
• Pedro Jensen (recently replacing Rosie Doole) (Wellington City area),
• Wayne Cowan (Wellington City), and
• Dave Bayly (Manager and looks after the Wairarapa area).

He then presented an overview of the current 2002– 2022 Regional Pest Management Plan with respect to pest plants.   This is a 20 year plan providing a long term vision with a formal review at least every five years – the next review is expected in 2007.   The plan covers the administration area of Greater Wellington, an area of 813,000 hectares on the bottom end of the North Island including the Territorial Local Authority areas of Wellington, Lower Hutt, Upper Hutt and Porirua Cities and Kapiti Coast, South Wairarapa, Carterton, and Masterton District Councils.   The plan is prepared under the legal authority of the Biosecurity Act 1993.

The plan is divided in four main Sections with management policy rationale varying dependant upon the Phase of Infestation, or whether the area was part of a defined Key Native Ecosystem.

1.   Eradication Plants

These pests are of limited distribution and density in the Wellington region, and have the potential to have serious adverse effects on values that are regionally significant if they were to become more widespread.   Every attempt will be made to eradicate these species – at no cost to the land owner.   Eradication is defined as “To destroy a pest at a rate that exceeds the survival rate of new recruits.   Control measures must continue until all individuals (including the seed bank for pest plants) have been destroyed”.

The following 13 Pest Plants are in the Eradication category.   Most are now uncommon in the Wellington Region and have been controlled and continue to be monitored at known sites.   Sightings should be reported to GW.

2.   Containment Plants

These pests are well established in some parts of the Greater Wellington region, but not in others.   Each species has been zoned, with different rules applying in different parts of the region.   The long term objective is to prevent the spread of containment pests into areas where they are relatively rare.   In zones where eradication seems possible, Greater Wellington will take responsibility for control.

The following 7 Pest Plants are in the Containment category and their eradication zones : –

A map of the eradication zones can be found at http://www.wrc.govt.nz/lm/PDFS/map.pdf.

3.   Suppression Plants

These pests are widespread throughout the Greater Wellington region.   Landowners are required to destroy any of the four suppression pest plants growing on their land – except for Old Man's Beard within Wellington City where a 10m boundary rule applies.   The long term objective is to suppress the density of these pests to minimise their impacts.

The following 4 Pest Plants are in the Suppression category : –

4.   Site Led Plants

These pests are so widespread throughout the region that boundary control is considered the only viable option.   Landowners are responsible for controlling infestations along their boundary and out to the specified distance.

The following 3 Pest Plants are in the Site Lead category – along with the boundary clearance distance : –

In addition to the above specific pest management programmes, site led programmes are also developed for specific Key Native Ecosystem designated areas.

Other Services that GW offers include : –
• Free weed identification
• Free weed control
• Biological control research
• Involvement in presentations and shows to advance community education Restoration advice

Following the formal part of Mark’s talk he answered questions from the floor and also with help from other members present identified some weeds brought to the meeting.

Questions from the floor included discussion on the following topics : –
• Biological Control – two types, classic and inundative.   Two success stories for biological control have been in the control of St. John’s Wort and Nodding Thistle.   Gorse has a number of biological control methods.
• Landowner enforcement process – the end result is a charge of the costs of control against the property plus legal and interest costs.
• Other weed advice programmes – Weedbusters is a joint DOC and Territorial Authority run programme to raise awareness on weed issues nationally.

Some of the weed samples brought for identification and discussion included : –
• Cape ivy (Senecio angulatus)
• Eleagnus (Eleagnus X reflexa)

Final thought – there are some 2500 indigenous vascular plants in New Zealand of which about 85% are regarded as endemic.   This is matched by somewhere between 20-40 000 exotic species of which about 10% are now regarded as naturalised – the number of which is steadily increasing.   Many exotic species are like ‘time-bombs’ gradually building up adaptations or population numbers ready to explode and invade more of the nation’s natural habitats.   The takeover by exotics that become naturalised to the determent of native species has the potential to become a huge problem unless there is continued vigilance.

For more information or advice about pest plants, contact the Greater Wellington Regional Council's Biosecurity staff on 06 378 2484 or 04 526 5325 or email pest.plants@gw.govt.nz.

Richard Herbert

 Monday 20 September 2004 :   Origin and biogeography of New Zealand Craspedia (Gnaphalieae: Compositae).

Craspedia "Tararua" – photo Kerry Ford.

Speaker Kerry Ford, University of Canterbury, discussed her recent research on Craspedia.

The genus Craspedia is a member of the daisy family, Compositae, and is represented by 23 species that are restricted to New Zealand (6 species) and Australia (17 species).   In New Zealand Craspedia is an outlier in the subtribe Angianthinae, with the remaining c. 60 genera of this subtribe endemic to Australia.

Craspedia in New Zealand are widely distributed through latitudes south of East Cape with a centre of density at north-west Nelson.   They are however, morphologically variable, and this variation does not reflect an easily understandable pattern, making species definition problematic.   Localised and morphologically distinct populations have resulted in the recognition of 45 informal undescribed entities.

In Australia distribution is confined to temperate regions with a density of distribution at the Kosciuzsko alpine zone, New South Wales – only one species is to be found outside temperate regions, C. haplorrhiza, which is also the only annual of the genus.

With regard to the relationship between New Zealand and Australian members of the genus, it was unclear whether there were one or several lineages shared between the two regions.   And this was the focus of Kerry’s research – to investigate whether Craspedia in New Zealand is a monophyletic (consistent with one dispersal event) or polyphyletic group (consistent with several dispersal events).

It is unlikely that a Gondwanan vicariant (long distance dispersal) hypothesis can explain the disjunct distribution of Craspedia between Australia and New Zealand.   The age at which Australia and New Zealand reached a maximum distance from each other by sea floor spreading is about 55 m.y.a. in the early Eocene.   The earliest records of a Compositae fossil (pollen) are about 30 m.y.a. in the middle Oligocene.   The earliest records from New Zealand and Australia are also fossil pollen from the Oligocene.   In New Zealand, which has near continuous Cenozoic Era (less than 65 m.y.a.) terrestrial stratigraphic sequences, the first record of Compositae (as fossil pollen) is from the Late Oligocene (c25 m.y.a).   Molecular phylogeographic evidence suggests that the Angianthinae are the result of an Australian Miocene (5 - 24 m.y.a) radiation.   Therefore jump-dispersal over ocean is a more plausible hypothesis to explain the disjunction.

A number of researchers have hypothesised adaptive radiations in New Zealand following more recent jump-dispersal events across the Tasman Sea, e.g. Epilobium, Hebe / Parahebe / Chionohebe complex, Myosotis and the alpine Ranunculus.   Dispersal to Australia of derivatives from New Zealand radiations has also been suggested.   However it has been argued by some, that propagule dispersal is one way across the Tasman Sea; i.e. west to east, in the direction of the prevailing westerly winds.

Craspedia "Garibaldi" – photo Kerry Ford.

These studies, together with those investigating the New Zealand fossil record have challenged the traditional view that the New Zealand flora is ancient (a Gondwanan relic).   Rather they support a relatively recent arrival via trans-oceanic dispersal in the late Tertiary and Quaternary (0.6 - 3 m.y.a.), and rapid radiation in New Zealand, particularly in flowering plant groups.

Discovering whether Craspedia in New Zealand is the result of one (monophyletic) or more (polyphyletic) colonisation events, and when this occurred, provides an important step in understanding the evolution and biogeography of the group.   It also provides a framework for further exploration of morphological, ecological and geographical patterns at a finer scale in New Zealand, and has relevance to the debate on the origins of the New Zealand flora, and the inter-relationships of the New Zealand and Australian floras.

Kerry described some of the NZ species that were included in her study and illustrated with photographs the following : – C. “Garibaldi”, C. “Tararua”, C. “elongata”, C. incana, C. “Otago”, C. lanata, C. robusta, C. “Clutha”, C. “Kaitorete”, and C. minor.

Kerry then described the basis of her work using DNA studies to group the various Craspedia species she studied into lineages.

An analysis of molecular data was used to reconstruct the evolutionary development within Craspedia from a sample of species and entities representative of the genus.   Outgroups to determine the direction of evolution were chosen from recent molecular phylogenies of the Australian and New Zealand Gnaphalieae.

The non-coding intergenic spacers ITS and ETS from the nuclear genome, and psbA-trnH from the chloroplast genome were used in this study, providing two independent data sets.   It was found that these molecular markers were variable enough to distinguish lineages, and to trace the origins of these lineages at a trans-Tasman biogeographic scale.

From her study Kerry has come to the following conclusions : –

• That NZ Craspedia is monophyletic, originating from a single jump-dispersal event,
• That there are 4 lineages of Craspedia, three in Australia and one in New Zealand,
• One of the Australian lineages, consisting of mostly subalpine and alpine species from the Kosciuszko alpine zone, was identified as most closely related to the New Zealand lineage, and
• That the jump-dispersal event bringing Craspedia to NZ probably occurred about 350,000 to 600,000 years ago.

Richard Herbert

For further information see www.math.canterbury.ac.nz/bio/SYSTANZ/data/kaf.html for an abstract of Kerry’s research at Canterbury University and, www.rsnz.govt.nz/publish/nzjb/1999/39.pdf for a copy of New Zealand Journal of Botany, 1999, Vol. 37 : 399–412, article “Phylogenetic relationships in Australasian Gnaphalieae (Compositae) inferred from ITS sequences” describing previous work.