10.5 DTZ Ltd South Island High Country Vegetation Database

List of all metadata reports | This report's TOC | Previous Page | Next Page

Database Title	10.5 DTZ Ltd South Island High Country Vegetation Database
Keywords Type1. Type 11.	Land; vegetation; grassland; high country; biodiversity condition
Abstract	This database includes quantitative vegetation information for 943 permanently marked sites in South Island high country grassland. The database began as a series of projects using the same methods. Over time these projects became 1 database. Most of the sites were covered by the "pastoral contract" which the the former Knight Frank (NZ) Ltd held with the Commissioner of Crown Lands. The database also includes High Country monitoring data collected under contract to other agencies, especially the Department of Conservation.
Geographical Coverage	South Island high country grasslands.
Dataset start date.	1970s
Dataset end date.	1999
Status/currency.	Data collection has ceased.
Update frequency.	N/A
Maintenance.	The database has been maintained in recent years through the "pastoral contract "with the Commissioner of Crown Lands. This contract has expired (end September, 1999) and is not being renewed because the Commissioner has determined that there is no statutory requirement for him / her to fund monitoring or research. The future management of the existing data is under discussion.

Technical Evaluation
Parameters- what is measured	Percentage cover of vegetation, litter, bare ground, rock and rubble. Relative abundance of each plant species (either a biomass ranking or estimate of species cover)
Parameters- what is calculated	N/A
Methods used to measure parameters	The database has been compiled using consistent methodology. Most of the monitoring programme behind the database is based on 50 or 100 m permanently marked transects with data based on repeated measurements from a 50cm by 50cm quadrat, placed at regular intervals along the transect. The parameters listed above are measured in each quadrat. A limited number of sheep and rabbit exclosure plots have also been established across a range of environments. Within these plots data collection has generally conformed to the same quadrat methodology. Transects and plots account for 80% of all sites. Other less frequently used methods which have been used for specific purposes, include the point height intercept method, photo plots and needle point analysis. Photo points have also been used to record the general character of the vegetation and any gross changes. In a number of surveys these additional techniques have been used in combination with a standard quadrat method.
Secondary sources of data	N/A
Scale of use.	N/A
Number of records	943 permanently marked sites.
GIS compatibility.	Yes. There is good location data.
Available formats for users.	Under discussion.
Access constraints.	Under discussion.
Measurement Accuracy	To be completed by database manager.
Completeness of dataset	To be completed by database manager.
Positional accuracy	To be completed by database manager.
Database steward	Unclear
Database custodian	DTZ
Database custodian contact person	Geoff Holgate
Database custodian Contact Address Phone Fax Email	P.O. Box 142 Christchurch +64 3 379 9787 +64 3 379 8440 gholgate@dtz.co.nz
References
Date metadata record prepared.	October 1999, updated May 2002
Author of metadata record.	Victoria Froude

Management Evaluation
Original purpose.	The database began as a series of individual monitoring programmes with their own objectives. The dominant theme was to measure the condition of high country vegetation and the effects of extensive pastoral management and land retirement. While many of the monitoring sites were established for this purpose, other sites were established to assess the effects of specific management practices such as ski field development, oversowing, tussock burning and particular grazing management practices.
Relationships with classification systems.	N/A
Relationships with other databases	N/A
Known relationships with proposed EPIP indicators.	N/A
Who uses this database?	The monitoring programme has primarily been carried out under the "pastoral contract" which the company held with the Commissioner of Crown Lands. In addition the former Knight Frank carried out high country monitoring under short term contracts to other agencies, especially the Department of Conservation. Potential users of the database include Department of Conservation, regional councils, territorial local authorities and private land owners.
Public awareness of the database	Low
Database strengths.	This is a long-term vegetation database where the data has been collected using consistent methodology This is one of the largest vegetation databases in New Zealand The relatively recent resurvey of sites established in the early to mid 1980s showed some widespread changes in species abundance over the previous decade.
Database limitations.	The long-term future of this database is uncertain given that funding has ceased. There is a low level of awareness of this database. Representativeness of the data is unproven because of the patchy coverage of the monitoring sites.

What are the Current and Emerging Uses of the Database for:
Assisting with determining historic state/baseline.	The database could assist with determining high country grassland land and biodiversity condition in the 1970s and 1980s.
Assisting with determining current state/baseline.	The database could assist with the identification of present day high country grassland land and biodiversity condition.
Assisting with modeling possible future outcomes.	There is potential for this. Distinctive changes in species patterns have been observed (using quantitative data). Predictions can be made using this data.
Risk assessment.	The database allows trends to be observed. This can assist with the identification of sites at risk due to environmental degradation.
Monitoring site selection and sample design.	The database is a series of projects that are not tied to a master strategy. There is a need to establish the representatives of the data for different parameters.
Aggregating and reporting data locally, regionally or nationally.	This is possible. The representativeness of the data would need confirmation.