Appendix 5: Examples of site assessments completed in the four catchment studies
Taieri Catchment
Site 1 - McRaes Creek (B-1 / 2.69 / 4.87)
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is not a traditional site
- Despite this, rūnanga members would return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are only average:
- It receives an average score for access. It is accessible, although it involves a significant walk.
- There is a reasonable range of mahinga kai species present, especially plants. However, this is a small tributary and there are not many fish species present.
- This is not a traditional site and therefore species sourced traditionally cannot be compared with those present today. Accordingly, a 1 was assigned to this part of the mahinga kai component.
- It scores highly because rūnanga members would return to the site.
- It scores very highly for component 3 stream health, in fact McRaes Creek received the highest ratings of all 46 sites:
- Catchment 4.6
- Modification 4.75
- Riparian 5
- Flow visible 5
- Water quality 5
The slightly lower score for "catchment" reflects the presence of some exotic species within a native catchment. The score for modification reflects the presence of a track through the watercourse that is used by mountain bikes and motorbikes.
Site 6 - Barbours Stream (B-0/ 1.3/ 3.02)
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is not a traditional site.
- Because of the degraded condition of the site, rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are poor:
- It scores poorly for access. It was be difficult for rūnanga members to find this site without assistance.
- Mahinga kai species were absent.
- This is not a traditional site and therefore species sourced traditionally cannot be compared with those present today. Accordingly, a 1 was assigned to this part of the mahinga kai component.
- It only scores 1 because rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- It received an average score for stream health:
- Catchment 2.5
- Modification 2.6
- Riparian 1
- Flow visible 5
- Water quality 4
The low scores for "catchment, modification and riparian" were due to this site being heavily modified by stock. In particular, the riparian was considered to be in poor condition. Despite this, a flow is visible in the river and the water quality appears to be high possibly because of the tussock in the catchment.
Site 11 - Owhiro Creek (A-0/ 1.75/ 1.65)
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is a traditional site.
- Rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are low:
- It receives a high score for access.
- Because the site is so modified, there is an absence of mahinga kai species, aside from eel.
- It scores highly because it is traditionally a significant site for eels and these are still present.
- It scores poorly because rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- It scores poorly for stream health, in fact it was one of the two poorest scoring sites for this component:
- Catchment 1
- Modification 1
- Riparian 1
- Flow visible 4
- Water quality 1.25
All scores apart from a visible flow are very low.
Kakaunui Catchment
Site 38 - Island Stream - Maheno (A-0/ 2.56/ 1.06)
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is a traditional site.
- Rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are only average:
- It receives a high score for access. It is easily accessible.
- There is a limited range of mahinga kai species present.
- It scores highly because it was a significant eel fishery and has the highest density of eels within either of the two catchments.
- It scores poorly because rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- It scores highly for stream health:
- Catchment 1
- Modification 1.3
- Riparian 1
- Flow visible 1
- Water quality 1
The consistently low scores for each of the indicators confirm the poor health of this site, the worst of the 46 study sites.
Hakatere Catchment
Site 1 - Gentleman Smith - A-1 / 4.25 / 3.80
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is a traditional site.
- Because of the healthy condition of the site, rūnanga members would return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are very good:
- It scores highly for access. It was be easy for rūnanga members to access this site without assistance.
- A reasonable range of mahinga kai species were present.
- This is a traditional site and all the species sourced traditionally are present today. Accordingly, a 5 was assigned to this part of the mahinga kai component.
- It scores 5 because rūnanga members would not return to the site in the future.
- It received an average score for stream health:
- Catchment 2.33
- Modification 3.33
- Clarity 4.66
- Bed condition 4.5
- Water quality 4.16
Of the 30 sites assessed in the Hakatere, this site scored the highest for component 2 - mahinga kai values.
Site 3 - Lambies Stream - B-0/ 2.0/ 3.13
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is not a traditional site.
- Rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are only average:
- It receives an average score for access.
- There is a limited range of mahinga kai species present.
- This is not a traditional site and therefore species sourced traditionally cannot be compared with those present today. Accordingly, a 1 was assigned to this part of the mahinga kai component.
- It scores poorly because the majority of rūnanga members would not return to the site.
- It receives average scores for stream health:
- Catchment 2.3
- Modification 3.66
- Clarity 3.16
- Bed condition 3.33
- Water quality 3.16.
Site 9 - Bowers Stream (Sharplin Falls) - A-1/ 3.25/4.87
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is a traditional site.
- Rūnanga members would return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are average:
- It receives a high score for access.
- Because the site is unmodified, there is a good range of mahinga kai species present.
- It scores poorly because it was traditionally a significant site for eels and these are no eels present today.
- It scores highly because rūnanga members would return to the site.
- It scores poorly for stream health, in fact it was one of the two poorest scoring sites for this component:
- Catchment 4.5
- Modification 5
- Clarity 5
- Bed condition 4.83
- Water quality 5
All scores are very high. Of the 30 sites assessed this received the highest score for component 3 - stream health.
Tukituki Catchment
Site 2 - Mangaomate Stream - B-1/2.72/3.75
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is not a traditional site.
- Because of the healthy condition of the site, iwi members would return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are average:
- It scores average for access. It would be easy for iwi members to access this site without assistance.
- A reasonable range of mahinga kai species were present.
- This is not traditional site and therefore scores 1 for the traditional species indicator in the mahinga kai component.
- It scores 5 because iwi members would return to the site in the future.
- It received an above average score for stream health:
- Flow 3.7
- Water quality 3.8
Site 4 - Unnamed tributary - Totora Hills stream - B-0/1.42/2.3
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is not a traditional site.
- Because of the unhealthy condition of the site, iwi members would return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are below average:
- It scores average for access. It was relatively easy for iwi members to access this site without assistance.
- A limited range of mahinga kai species were present.
- This is not traditional site and therefore scores 1 for the traditional species indicator in the mahinga kai component.
- It scores 1 because iwi members would not return to the site in the future.
- It received an above average score for stream health:
- Flow 2.4
- Water quality 2.2
Site 5 - Mangaoho Stream - B-1/2.62/4.0
The assessment confirmed that:
- This is not a traditional site.
- Because of the healthy condition of the site, iwi members would return to the site.
- Its mahinga kai values are average:
- It receives an average score for access.
- A reasonable range of mahinga kai species were present.
- This is not traditional site and therefore scores 1 for the traditional species indicator in the mahinga kai component.
- It scores above average because iwi members would return to the site in the future.
- It received an above average score for stream health:
- Flow 4.1
- Water quality 3.9
