Literature review of Porirua Harbour and catchmentAppendix 2: Annotated BibliographyRichardson, J. R. , A. A1dridge and W. d. L. Main (1979). Disi"ibuii0, I o11he New Zeulo, ,d cockleChione stutchburyi ulpuuoinhonuilnlet. Oceanographic Institute, DSIR, Field Report N' 14The NZ cockle dominates the mudflats of Pauatahanui Inlet and as part of the PEP, acensus survey was carried out on November 30 1976. Baseline cockle survey (latersurveys described by Grange and others 1993, 1996, 1999)Slidolph, S. R. (1980). A record of some coastal marine dia<strong>to</strong>ms from Porirua Harbour, NorthIsland, New Zealand. New ZealandJournulofBomi?y 18. 379-403.Comprehensive list of dia<strong>to</strong>m (algae) flora of POTirua Harbour area, including speciessize, description and occurrence. Samples were collected over 3 years. Illustrations ofalgae species foundSlidolph, S. R. (1981). Gyrusigmu bullicwi, I var. Iurgidum, a new dia<strong>to</strong>m variety from POTiruaHarbour, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Borony 19. 405.Describes in Latin a new dia<strong>to</strong>m species that occurs in POTirua HarbourWear, R. and M. Haddon (1987). Natural diet of the crab Ovalipes calhttrws (Crustacea,Portunidae) around central and northern New Zealand. Marine Ecology Progress Series 35. . 39-49Examines the gut content of crabs <strong>to</strong> deterrinne the most important elements of their dietDiet varied according <strong>to</strong> location around New Zealand but juvenile molluscs andcrustaceans were the most important components. Crustaceans were the most importantdietary component at Paremata, whilst molluscs (Nucu!a lionvigiona) were mostimportant at PIimmer<strong>to</strong>n. Table of fauna found in the guts of the crabsEstuarine water qua"tyBerry, A. (1996b). Cousinl warer quality 1/10niiorii?g network. WeSIerit Welling10/1 Region1995/96. Resource Investigations Department, <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> Regional Council, Publication N"WRC/RINV-T-96124Summary of routine summer and annual coastal sampling of water quality in terms ofenterococci and faecal conforms, in relation <strong>to</strong> contact recreation in order <strong>to</strong> assess healthrisks. Discusses broad spatial and temporal trends. Data tables and graphs available asappendixBerry, A. (1997a). Annual cousinl warer quality report for Ihe weSIern Welling10n Region1996/97. Resource Investigations Department, <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> Regional Council, Report N"WRC\RINV-T-97115Routine coastal sampling of water quality as initiated in Berry (1996b). Similar <strong>to</strong> Berry(1996b) but also summarises water quality for each location and compares data collectedsince 1990, (no significant change). Water quality in relation <strong>to</strong> seafood consumption isalso analysed. Sample site near the mouth of POTirua Stream is usually poor, and the areaaround the Paremata Bridge is usually within guideline values. Other sites are fine forcontact recreation except for PIimmer<strong>to</strong>n in the summer. Faecal coliforms are lowenough <strong>to</strong> safely consume shellfish at Paremata bridge only.Berry, A. (1998a). Annual COQsiul water qunlii), I'eporifor Ihe weSIerii Well^}Ig<strong>to</strong>n Region1997/98. Resource Investigation Department, <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> Regional Council, Report N"WRC/RINV-G-9814Report for Porirua City Council & <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> City CouncilBlaschke and Rutherford Environmental ConsultantsFebruary 20.028
Literature review of Porirua Harbour and catchmentAppendix 2: Annotated BibliographyRoutine coastal water quality report as initiated with Berry (1996). Similar <strong>to</strong> Berry(1997a) but does not compare years. Shellfish are not moni<strong>to</strong>red at Porirua Harbour. 14sites moni<strong>to</strong>red in POTirua Harbour: one of these exceeded the enterococci guidelinesBerry, A. (1999). Annual coastal water q!tuffty rayon for the weSIern <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> Region,1998/99. Resource Investigation Department, Welling10n Regional Council, Publication N'WRC/RINV-G-9914.Routine coastal water quality report as initiated with Berry (1996b). Similar <strong>to</strong> Berry(1998a) but also discusses possible sources. Poor water quality at the site closest <strong>to</strong>Porirua Stream mouth, receives Te Hiko Street s<strong>to</strong>rmwater discharge, Semple SIdischarge and inputs from the POTirua Stream mouth. PIimmer<strong>to</strong>n Beach also failed <strong>to</strong>reach contact recreation guidelines. The mouth of Taupo Stream had enterococci countsof 300-3,000 per looml. Taupo Stream is likely <strong>to</strong> receive faecal materials from animalsMCBride (1995) found that the concentration of bacteria dropped along PIimmer<strong>to</strong>nBeach with increased distance from Taupo Stream. High counts at the water ski club,Pauatahanuilnlet are likely 10 be sourced from localstreams draining CainbourneMCBride, G. B. , M. Moore and A. Donnison (1995). Review o1 seawaier qualify at Ponywa'srecreuiionul benches, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd. and the MeatIndustry Research Institute of New Zealand Inc. for POTirua City Council and <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong>Regional Council, Consultancy Report N" PCC300Review of all available data <strong>to</strong> describe the bacteriological contamination of POTirua'sbeaches. Detailed statistical analysis of spatial and temporal trends, taking in<strong>to</strong> countvariations caused by wind, tide and stream flow. The dominant source of faecalconforms at PIimmer<strong>to</strong>n Beach is local, with the magnitude of the faecal count beingproportionate 10 distance from Taupo Stream. Finds no evidence that sewage works areresponsible for high bacteriological counts.Davis, K. and C. I. Wilson (1983). A buc!eriologicul survey o1 Pony!{a Harbour undPawomhttnwil, Ilei. <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong>, <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> Regional CouncilConclusions by site including Pauatahanui Inlet and Onepo<strong>to</strong> Arm relating <strong>to</strong> waterquality standards. PIimmer<strong>to</strong>n/Paremata displayed a high standard of water qualityPauatahanui Inlet water unlikely <strong>to</strong> have met standard for shellfish gathering or bathingRainfall and accumulated run-off were the major fac<strong>to</strong>rs influencing faecal coliformlevels. The water quality in the Onepoio Arm was adversely affected during wet weatheralthough <strong>to</strong> a lesser extentthan Pauatahanuilnlet. Faecal conform levels were exceededat most sites (not always associated with high rainfall) therefore the waters are probablyriot suitable for gathering shellfish or bathingMilne, I. R. (2005). 0111he beaches. Recreuiio, tat water quality o11he Well^I^8101t Region, 2004-2005. <strong>Greater</strong> <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> Regional Council, Report N" GWR. INV-G-05/189.Routine recreational water quality as initiated with Berry (1996b) and similar <strong>to</strong>Stephenson (2004). 14 sites moni<strong>to</strong>red in POTirua Harbour; 5 sites exceeded theenterococci guidelines once, and two exceeded them twice. Not all of these events wereassociated with high rainfallMilne, I. (2005). Recreu!ional warer quality Iechnical repori. <strong>Greater</strong> <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> RegionalCouncil, GWR. INV-T-05189Presents the results of all routine recreational water quality moni<strong>to</strong>ring undertaken at 23freshwater and 27 marine sites between Nov 2001 and Mar 2005. Filamen<strong>to</strong>us algaecover and microbiallevels were assessed against health guidelines for recreation. AlsoReport for Porirua City Council & <strong>Welling<strong>to</strong>n</strong> City CouncilBlaschke and Rutherford Environmental ConsultantsFebruary 201029
- Page 5 and 6: ,,Literature review of Porirua Harb
- Page 7 and 8: Literature review of Porirua Harbou
- Page 9 and 10: Literature review of Porirua Harbou
- Page 11 and 12: ILiterature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 13 and 14: ,Literature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 15 and 16: .Literature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 17 and 18: ,Literature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 19 and 20: ,Literature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 21 and 22: Literature review of Porirua Harbou
- Page 23 and 24: ,Literature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 25 and 26: , .iLiterature review of Porirua Ha
- Page 27: ';Literature review of Porirua Harb
- Page 31 and 32: Literature review of Porirua Harbou
- Page 33 and 34: Literature review of Porirua Harbou
- Page 35 and 36: Literature review of Porirua Harbou
- Page 37 and 38: Literature review of Porirua Harbou
- Page 39 and 40: I,-Literature review of Porirua Har
- Page 41 and 42: ,Literature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 43 and 44: *Literature review of Porirua Harbo
- Page 45 and 46: ,.Literature review of Porirua Harb
- Page 47 and 48: , ,Literature review of Porirua Har