EPA Staff Assessment Report€¦ · An average seed dispersal of 780 seeds per m2 at a study site in the Marlborough region was recorded, however, the maximum recorded seed density

1

EPA Staff Assessment Report

APP203841: To determine the new organism status of Clematis vitalba

June 2019

2

EPA advice Application APP203841

Executive Summary

Application APP203841, submitted by Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, seeks a determination

on the new organism status of Clematis vitalba.

After reviewing all of the available information and completing a literature search concerning the

organism, EPA staff recommend that Clematis vitalba is not a new organism for the purpose of the

Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) based on the evidence that this organism

has been identified and present in New Zealand since before 29 July 1998 when the HSNO Act came

into effect.

3


Table of contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 2

Table of contents ................................................................................................................................... 3

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 4

2 Organism description ................................................................................................................. 4

3 Evidence for the presence of Clematis vitalba in New Zealand ............................................. 5

4 Comments from agencies .......................................................................................................... 6

5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 6

6 Recommendation ........................................................................................................................ 7

7 References ................................................................................................................................... 8

8 Appendix 1: Decision path for section 26 determination........................................................ 9

9 Appendix 2: Comments from MPI ............................................................................................ 15

4


1 Introduction

Application summary

1.1 On 16 April 2019, Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research (MWLR) applied to the EPA under

section 26 of the HSNO Act seeking a determination on the new organism status of Clematis

vitalba.

1.2 The applicant considers this organism to be not new and provided evidence to support this.

The evidence to demonstrate that this organism is present in New Zealand consisted of

evidence from scientific literature and historical evidence in New Zealand such as records

from herbariums, public awareness campaigns and regional pest management strategies.

1.3 Section 2A(1) of the HSNO Act prescribes that a new organism is, in part, an organism

belonging to a species that was not present in New Zealand immediately before 29 July 1998.

It is against that criterion that we evaluated the evidence available for the organism in the

application.

1.4 The application was formally received for consideration on 22 May 2019.

2 Organism description

Clematis vitalba

Taxonomic Unit Classification

Order Ranunculales

Family Ranunculaceae

Genus Clematis

Species Clematis vitalba L.

Synonyms N/A

Common names Old man’s beard

2.1 Old man’s beard is a broadleaved, perennial, woody vine that can live for 40 years or more

(West 1991). Woody stems can grow to over 10 m in length and can reach 15 to 20 cm in

diameter. It can attain densities of 7000 stems per ha and a fresh weight increment of 6.3 kg

m-2 yr-1 (Gourlay et al. 2000). New stems have been recorded to grow as much as 3 m per

year producing 20 new nodes with secondary stems developing from these nodes (West

1991; West 1992). Vines can climb 25 m tall trees but have difficulty colonising tall emergent

species with long distances between branches (Ogle et al. 2000).

2.2 Old man’s beard stems frequently hang like a curtain along the forest edge. The climbing front

is at the top of the plant amongst foliage and it does not strangle its host (West 1991)

2.3 Old man’s beard is a versatile plant capable of growing in a variety of habitats, on a variety of

substrates from trees and shrubs in the forest margins to riverbanks, fence lines and

5


grasslands (CABI 2018). It is commonly associated with disturbed and degraded areas. It

grows in forest margins and gaps and invades open areas. It is reproductively efficient

producing a large number of feathery seeds.

2.4 Old man’s beard grows on well-drained, moderately fertile soils. It is unlikely that poorly

drained soils or arid areas will support old man’s beard. It does not seem to be sensitive to

nutrient deficiencies or soil acidity (Hume et al. 1995). A study of old man’s beard in a forest

remnant in south Canterbury suggested that germination and growth in response to light and

nitrogen could account for the observed patterns and establishment success of old man’s

beard in forest remnants in New Zealand (Morton et al. 1998).

2.5 Seedlings do not flower before the third year. Insects visit old man’s beard flowers, although

pollination can be successful without insect vectors. An average seed dispersal of 780 seeds

per m2 at a study site in the Marlborough region was recorded, however, the maximum

recorded seed density in the soil seed bank was 900 seeds m-2 (West 1992). The average

amount of seed fall recorded in a one year study was 64.8 seeds m-2 yr-1 whereas the average

amount of seed germinating from the seed bank was 505 seeds m-2 yr-1. This gave an

approximately eight fold difference between quantities of seed in the seed fall and seed bank.

2.6 The same study estimated that seeds remain viable in the soil for between five and ten years

(West 1992).

2.7 Old man’s beard spreads via rivers because vegetative parts are broken in floods and seeds

disperse downstream. Seeds can be carried by mammals, birds, water and the wind

(Macfarlane & Van den Ende 1993).

2.8 Extracts from old man’s beard are used as a folk remedy for the treatment of various

inflammatory ailments including rheumatism (Yesilada & Küpeli 2007). Young boiled shoots

are reported to be edible, however, the plant is considered poisonous and should not be

consumed.

3 Evidence regarding the presence of Clematis vitalba in New Zealand

3.1 Old man’s beard was introduced into New Zealand as an ornamental plant prior to 1922

(Gourlay et al. 2000). Old man’s beard was first advertised in J Lenny and Sons of Invercargill

pre-1925 catalogue at one shilling and six pennies each (Marlborough District Council, 2004).

During this period, it was commonly known as ‘traveller’s joy’.

3.2 Individual specimens were introduced to Marlborough early on with the oldest herbarium

record in New Zealand collected from a garden in Picton in 1922. Fourteen years later, the

first herbarium records of wild plants were made and included an individual old man’s beard

plant from Picton (Marlborough District Council, 2004).

3.3 In the 1940s, old man’s beard was recorded by Arthur Healy, in several locations from north of

Cape Campbell through to Picton and at Kaikoura and Waiau (Marlborough District Council,

2004).

6


3.4 By the late 1970s, old man’s beard was becoming a seriously invasive weed throughout New

Zealand with proposals to change its name from ‘traveller’s joy’ to ‘old man’s beard’ to remove

any positive connotations in its public perception (Marlborough District Council, 2004).

3.5 In 1983-84 the Noxious Plant Council undertook a survey of the distribution of old man’s beard

throughout the country that showed plants scattered along the east coast and up rivers of

Marlborough (Marlborough District Council, 2004).

3.6 The invasiveness of the plant was well recognised by 1984 and a national public awareness

campaign was run in the late 1980s - David Bellamy’s ‘old man’s beard must go’ campaign in

1989 (New Zealand On Screen, 1989).

3.7 Old man’s beard was identified in a 1992 report by the New Zealand Department of Scientific

and Industrial Research (DSIR) as “probably the greatest single threat to remnants of native

forests in New Zealand” (West 1992). In 2000, authors from DOC noted that old man’s beard

is probably the most widely publicised environmental weed in New Zealand (Ogle et al. 2000).

3.8 Old man’s beard was declared an unwanted organism under the Biosecurity Act in 1993

(Unwanted Organisms Register, 2019).

3.9 Old man’s beard has been recognised as one of the worst environmental weeds in New

Zealand for about 30 years (Syrett 1984; Williams & Timmins 1990).

3.10 Old man’s beard is a minor weed of vineyards, hedgerows and pine plantations in its native

and introduced ranges in Europe (CABI 2018).

3.11 Old man’s beard grows strongly in forest margins and light gaps where vines can form a

dense light-absorbing canopy that suppresses all vegetation beneath. It changes forest

structure as well as recruitment patterns in forests (Ogle et al. 2000; CABI 2018).

3.12 Old man’s beard appears to be distributed mainly in the central parts of New Zealand and

generally found in lowland podocarp or broadleaved forest remnants (West 1992). Many of

these forest remnants are scenic reserves and some of these reserves have been severely

degraded by old man’s beard. In Nelson, Marlborough, Wellington, Wairarapa and the

Taihape regions tall podocarps, kowhai and other broadleaved species are being killed due to

old man’s beard infestations.

3.13 Evidence of old man’s beard widespread establishment prior to 29 July, 1998 exists in New

Zealand herbaria (MWLR Systematics Collection database).

3.14 Several hundred hectares of land bordering rivers are infested with old man’s beard, notably in

the Manawatu, Nelson and along the lower Clutha River (Macfarlane & Van den Ende 1993).

At least 387 km along 43 rivers are infested with old man’s beard. Upstream sites with old

man’s beard threaten a further 1,385 km of uninfested banks.

4 Comments from Agencies

4.1 The EPA requested comment on the application from the Department of Conservation (DOC)

and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI).

7


4.2 DOC stated that old man’s beard has been subject to formalised weed control programmes

since at least the early 1980s. DOC provided an example of old man’s beard from New

Zealand in scientific literature which showcases the vast quantity of information within New

Zealand on this species.

4.3 MPI stated the applicant has provided documented information demonstrating that old man’s

beard was widely present in New Zealand prior to 29 July, 1998. MPI stated that they believe

this information conclusively demonstrates this and supports the applicant’s claim that old

man’s beard is not a new organism. MPI is of the view that old man’s beard is widespread

throughout New Zealand and is a declared pest in most Regional Pest Management Plans.

4.4 MPI’s comments can be read in Appendix 2.

5 Conclusion

5.1 After completing our assessment of the information that was submitted by the applicant, as

well as our own findings, we consider that Clematis vitalba was present in New Zealand

immediately before 29 July 1998 and has had an ongoing presence in New Zealand since its

introduction in 1922.

6 Recommendation

6.1 A new organism is defined in section 2A of the Act, and includes:

(a) An organism belonging to a species that was not present in New Zealand immediately

before 29 July 1998:

6.2 The following Act criteria were not applicable to this determination as the species under

consideration in this application;

has not been prescribed as a risk species (section 2A(1)(b));

has not been approved to be held in containment or released with controls (sections

2A(1)(c), (ca) and (cb));

is not a genetically modified organism (section 2A(1)(d)); and

has not been eradicated from New Zealand (section 2A(1)(e)).

6.3 Based on the evidence provided by the applicant, as well as evidence found in our own

examination of this question, we conclude that Clematis vitalba was present in New Zealand

immediately before 29 July 1998, and has had a continuing presence in New Zealand to the

present date. We, therefore, recommend that Clematis vitalba should be determined to be not

a new organism.

8


7 References

CABI, 2018. Invasive Species Compendium: Clematis vitalba (old man’s beard).

https://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/14280#70281CB8-9372-4602-9441-B79DD1BFE092

(Retrieved 15 April 2019)

Gourlay, A., Wittenberg, R., Hill, R., Spiers, A. and Fowler, S. 2000. The biological control programme

against Clematis vitalba in New Zealand. Proceedings of the Xth International Symposium on

Biological Control of Weeds. 799-806.

Hume, L., West, C. and Watts, H. 1995. Nutritional requirements of Clematis vitalba L (old man’s

beard). New Zealand Journal of Botany 33(3): 301-313.

Macfarlane, R. and Van den Ende, H. 1993. Insects feeding on old man's beard (Clematis vitalba) and

native Clematis spp. in New Zealand. Unpublished report.

Marlborough District Council – Clematis vitalba (Old Man’s Beard) in South Marlborough. June 2004.

https://www.marlborough.govt.nz/repository/libraries/id:1w1mps0ir17q9sgxanf9/hierarchy/Doc

uments/Environment/Biosecurity/Old%20Man%27s%20Beard%20list/OMBreportfinalJune21.p

df (Retrieved 16 April 2019)

Morton, J.D., McNeil, D.L. and Daly, G.T. 1998. Effects of irradiance and nitrogen on Clematis vitalba

establishment in a New Zealand lowland podocarp forest remnant. New Zealand Journal of

Botany 36(4): 661-670.

MWLR: Systematics Collection Database: Clematis vitalba search.

https://scd.landcareresearch.co.nz/Search (Retrieved 23 April 2019)

New Zealand On Screen: David Bellamy’s ‘Old man’s beard must go’ campaign from 1989:

https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/old-mans-beard-must-go-1989 (Retrieved 23 April 2019)

Ogle, C., La Cock, G., Arnold, G. and Mickleson, N. 2000. Impact of an exotic vine Clematis vitalba (F.

Ranunculaceae) and of control measures on plant biodiversity in indigenous forest, Taihape,

New Zealand. Austral Ecology 25(5): 539-551.

Syrett, P. 1984. Prospects for the biological control of Clematis vitalba with insects. In: The Clematis

vitalba threat. Department of Lands and Survey series. 11: 50-56.

Unwanted Organisms Register (UOR): Clematis vitalba search:

https://www1.maf.govt.nz/uor/searchframe.htm (Retrieved 14 May 2019)

West, C. 1991. Literature review of the biology of Clematis vitalba (old man's beard). Unpublished

report. DSIR Land Resources Vegetation Report No. 725.

West, C. 1992. Ecological studies of Clematis vitalba (old man's beard) in New Zealand. Unpublished

report. DSIR Land Resources Vegetation Report No. 736.

Williams, P.A. and Timmins, S.M. 1990. Weeds in New Zealand protected natural areas: a review for

the Department of Conservation. Science and Research Series 14. Wellington, Department of

Conservation. 114.

Yesilada, E. and Küpeli, E. 2007. Clematis vitalba L. aerial part exhibits potent anti-inflammatory,

antinociceptive and antipyretic effects. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 110(3): 504-515.

https://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/14280#70281CB8-9372-4602-9441-B79DD1BFE092

https://www.marlborough.govt.nz/repository/libraries/id:1w1mps0ir17q9sgxanf9/hierarchy/Documents/Environment/Biosecurity/Old%20Man%27s%20Beard%20list/OMBreportfinalJune21.pdf



https://scd.landcareresearch.co.nz/Search

https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/old-mans-beard-must-go-1989

https://www1.maf.govt.nz/uor/searchframe.htm

9


8 Appendix 1: Decision path for section 26 determination

Context

This decision pathway describes the decision-making process for applications under Section

26 for determination as to whether an organism is a new organism.

Introduction

The purpose of this decision pathway is to provide the HSNO decision maker1 with guidance

so that all relevant matters in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (1996)

(the Act) and the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Organisms Not Genetically

Modified) Regulations (1998) (the Regulations) have been addressed. It does not attempt to

direct the weighting that the HSNO decision maker may decide to make on individual aspects

of an application.

The decision pathway has two parts –

Flowchart (a logic diagram showing the process prescribed in the HSNO Act and

the Methodology to be followed in making a decision), and

Explanatory notes (a discussion of each step of the process).

Of necessity the words in the boxes in the flowchart are brief, and key words are used to

summarise the activity required. The explanatory notes provide a description of each of the

numbered items in the flowchart, and describe the processes that should be followed.

For proper interpretation of the decision pathway it is important to work through the flowchart

in conjunction with the explanatory notes.

1 The HSNO decision maker refers to either the EPA Board or any committee or persons with delegated authority from the Board.

10


11


Figure 17 Explanatory Notes

Item 1 Review the content of the application and all relevant information

Review the application, staff advice and any relevant information held by other

Agencies, and advice from experts.

Item 2 Is further information required?

Review the information and determine whether or not there is sufficient information

available to make a decision.

Item 3 Seek additional information (Section 52 and Section 58)

If the HSNO decision maker considers that further information is required, then this

may be sought either from the applicant (if there is an external applicant) or from

other sources.

If the HSNO decision maker considers that the information may not be complete but

that no additional information is currently available, then the HSNO decision maker

may proceed to make a determination.

If the application is not approved on the basis of lack of information (or if the

organism is considered new) and further information becomes available at a later

time, then the HSNO decision maker may choose to revisit this determination.

Item 4 Is it an organism (i.e. fits the “organism” definition in Section 2)?

An organism

(a) does not include a human being:

(ab) includes a human cell:

(b) includes a micro-organism:

(c) includes a genetic structure, other than a human cell, that is capable of replicating

itself, whether that structure comprises all or only part of an entity, and whether it

comprises all or only part of the total genetic structure of an entity:

(d) includes an entity (other than a human being) declared to be an organism for the

purposes of the Biosecurity Act 1993:

(e) includes a reproductive cell or developmental stage of an organism

If yes, go to item 5.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1996/0030/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM314622

12


If no, as this is not an organism, it is not regulated under the new organism provisions

of the HSNO Act.

Item 5 Is the determination about a potential GMO (Section 2A(1)(d))?

If the determination relates to whether an organism is a potential GMO, go to

pathway B.

If the organism is not a GMO, go to item 6.

Item 6 Does the organism belong to a species that was known to be present in NZ

immediately before 29 July 1998 (Section 2A(1)(a))?

Determine on the basis of the available information whether on balance of

probabilities the organism is known to belong to a species that was present in New

Zealand immediately prior to 29 July 1998.

For the purposes of making a Section 26 determination an organism is considered to

be present in New Zealand if it can be established that the organism was in New

Zealand:

(a) immediately before 29 July 1998; and

(b) not in contravention of the Animals Act 1967 or the Plants Act 1970 (excluding

rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus, or rabbit calicivirus).

If yes, go to item 7 to test the organism against the next criterion.

If no, go to item 12.

Item 7 Is the organism prescribed as a risk species and was not present in New

Zealand at the time of promulgation of the relevant regulation (Section

2A(1)(b))?

Determine whether the organism belongs to a species, subspecies, infrasubspecies,

variety, strain, or cultivar that has been prescribed as a risk species by regulation

established under Section 140(1)(h) of the Act. If the organism is prescribed as a risk

species, determine whether it was present in New Zealand when it was prescribed.

The organism is a new organism if it was not present in New Zealand at the time of

the promulgation of the relevant regulation.

Note: at this point it may become apparent that the organism is an unwanted

organism under the Biosecurity Act. If this is the case, then MPI and DOC may be

advised (they may already have been consulted under items 1, 2 and 3).

If yes, go 12.

If no, go to item 8 to test the organism against the next criterion.

13


Item 8 Has a containment approval been given for the organism under the Act

(Section 2A(1)(c))?

For the purposes of making a Section 26 determination, this will also include the

following organisms which are “deemed” to be new organisms with containment

approvals under the HSNO Act:

(a) animals lawfully imported under the Animals Act 1967 before 29 July 1998

pursuant to Section 254 of the HSNO Act;

(b) animals lawfully present in New Zealand in a place that was registered as a

zoo or circus under the Zoological Garden Regulations 1977 pursuant to Section 255

of the HSNO Act (except where other organisms of the same taxonomic classification

were lawfully present outside of a zoo or circus –see section 2A(2)(c));

(c) hamsters lawfully imported under the Hamster Importation and Control

Regulations 1972 pursuant to Section 256 of the HSNO Act; or

(d) plants lawfully imported under the Plants Act 1970 before 29 July 1998

pursuant to Section 258 of the HSNO Act.



Item 9 Has a conditional release approval been given for the organism (Section

2A(1)(ca))?



Item 10 Has a qualifying organism with controls approval been given for the organism

(Section 2A(1)(cb))?

A “qualifying organism” is an organism that is or is contained in a “qualifying

medicine” or “qualifying veterinary medicine”. These terms are defined in Section 2 of

the HSNO Act.



Item 11 Is the organism known to have been previously eradicated (Section 2A(1)(e))?

Determine whether the organism belongs to a species, subspecies, infrasubspecies,

variety, strain, or cultivar that is known to have been previously eradicated.

Eradication does not include extinction by natural means but is considered to be the

result of a deliberate act.

14



If no, then the organism is not a new organism.

Item 12 Has HSNO release approval without controls been given for an organism of the

same taxonomic classification under Sections 35, 38 or 38I of the Act or has an

organism of the same taxonomic classification been prescribed as a not new

organism (Section 2A(2)(a))?

If a release approval has been given for an organism of the same taxonomic

classification under Section 35 or 38 of the Act then the organism is not a new

organism. If a release approval has been given for an organism of the same

taxonomic classification under Section 38I of the Act without controls then the

organism is not a new organism, however, if this approval has been given with

controls then it is a new organism.

If an organism of the same taxonomic classification has been prescribed by

regulations as not a new organism2 then it is not a new organism.

If yes, the organism is not a new organism.

If no, the organism is a new organism.

2 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2009/0143/latest/whole.html#DLM2011201

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2009/0143/latest/whole.html#DLM2011201

15


Appendix 2: Comments from MPI