Category Archives: Queensland

Assessing the effectiveness of Integrated Pest Management in Queensland

Key words: Integrated Pest Management, pest fish control, Native Fish Strategy

Threats and Impacts: Carp (Cyprinus carpio) are believed to impact on native fish communities by increasing turbidity, up-rooting delicate shallow-rooted vegetation, competing with native fishes and other aquatic fauna for food and space, and indirectly promoting the development of toxic algal blooms.

All of the currently available methods for Carp control have limitations. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) involves the application of a range of technologies applied simultaneously, and focussing on achieving broader objectives (e.g. improved habitat) rather than simply reducing pest numbers.

Broad aim and specific objectives: The objectives of this project were to apply a range of Carp control techniques, as an integrated package, to:

  • intensively reduce Carp at a particular location, and measure the response;
  • achieve a significant reduction in damage caused by Carp using existing techniques; and,
  • demonstrate to the community the commitment to on-ground control.

The study was conducted at four lagoon sites, two in the Condamine River catchment, and two in the Macintyre river catchment.

Methods: One lagoon in each catchment was selected as an experimental site for intensive carp removal, and the other was used as a reference site which received no carp treatment.

Each site was sampled on eight occasions for the following response variables: water quality (temperature, pH, conductivity, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, light penetration, available forms of nitrogen and phosphorus); phytoplankton biovolume and diversity; zooplankton biomass and diversity; benthic macroinvertebrate abundance and diversity; native fish abundance, biomass and diversity; carp abundance, biomass and size distribution; and abundance of piscivorous birds and turtles.

One sampling event was conducted before the carp reduction treatment and a further seven samples were performed after Carp reduction. Carp removal employed a variety of methods based on boat electrofishing, gill nets, fyke nets, angling, commercial-scale netting and traps, and screens to prevent re-entry of Carp.

Figure 1: electrofishing during carp removal at rainbow lagoon. (Photo courtesy Peter Gehrke)

Figure 1: electrofishing during carp removal at rainbow lagoon. (Photo courtesy Peter Gehrke)

Figure 2: Researcher Sarah St Pierre live picking macroinvertebrates (Photo courtesy of Nissa Murphy)

Figure 2: Researcher Sarah St Pierre live picking macroinvertebrates (Photo courtesy of Nissa Murphy)

Findings: In Rainbow Lagoon (one of the experimental sites), Carp removal achieved an estimated 51% reduction in abundance and 43% biomass reduction, compared with 41% abundance and 33% biomass reductions in Warra Lagoon (the other experimental site). Reduction of Carp biomass by approximately 30 kg per ha allowed a threefold increase of more than 90 kg per ha in native fish that are eaten by larger fish species and fish-eating birds.

The size and weight of Carp removed differed markedly between Warra Lagoon and Rainbow Lagoon. Rainbow Lagoon had large numbers of small Carp, while Warra Lagoon had relatively large numbers of big Carp, with relatively few small individuals. The differences in Carp populations between lagoons are likely to result in different ecosystem responses over time.

Boat electrofishing was the most effective method of Carp removal used; fyke nets were the second most effective method, while the number of Carp removed by angling was far lower than other methods.

A succession of ‘transient’ responses to Carp reduction was observed in treatment lagoons. Whilst the exact nature of succession differed between lagoons, the generalised pattern following Carp reduction was evidenced as (i) an increase in biomass of large zooplankton; (ii) an increase in abundance of benthic macroinvertebrates; and (iii) increased biomass of gudgeons (Hypseleotris spp.) and Bony Herring (Nematalosa erebi).

These results suggest that of the full set of potential ecosystem responses to Carp reduction, only a subset may be demonstrated in individual locations because of the influence of local drivers and constraints. Due to a range of factors, the environmental responses of several variables, including water quality, macrophytes, zooplankton and macroinvertebrates, could not be linked to Carp control.

Lessons learned and future directions:Modest reductions in Carp biomass can provide significant benefits for native fish and, if continued, may be expected to translate into longer-term increases in native fish populations.

  • Carp in turbid wetlands interact strongly with native fish through pelagic food web pathways involving zooplankton, as well as benthic macroinvertebrate pathways.
  • Carp reduction has the potential to contribute significantly to restoring populations of native fish by increasing food availability.
  • Environmental outcomes of Carp reduction include direct conservation benefits to native fish, potential increases in popular recreational species and improved aquatic ecosystem health.
  • Piscivorous fish (e.g. Murray cod, Maccullochella peelii) are likely to have increased prey availability as a result of Carp reduction.
  • Improving native fish populations in key wetlands by reducing Carp biomass may strengthen the value of permanent lagoons as drought refuges for native fish.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies: This project was funded through the Murray-Darling Basin Authority’s Native Fish Strategy.

Contact: Sarah St Pierre, SMEC. Tel: + 61 (07) 3029 6600.

Link: http://www.finterest.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/MD923%20Integrated%20pest%20management%20QLD.pdf

From Rainforest to Oil Palms and back again: a Daintree Rainforest Rescue in far north Queensland

Robert Kooyman, Joe Reichl, Edie Beitzel, Grant Binns, Jennifer Croes, Erryn Stephens, and Madeleine Faught

The establishment of Oil Palm (Elaeis guineensis) plantations is responsible for massive rainforest clearing and destruction throughout the tropics of Southeast Asia and beyond, and has captured the attention of conservation organisations around the world. One such organisation is Rainforest Rescue (RR), a not for profit Australian based conservation NGO. Through local and international projects (including in the Daintree region of Australia and Sumatra in Indonesia) RR has undertaken conservation actions that include removal of Oil Palm plantations to re-establish rainforest close to National Park areas.

The rainforest of the Daintree region provides an active window into the evolution, biogeography, and ecology of the southern (Gondwanan) rainforests, and their interaction with Indo-Malesian floristic elements. It has many (ca. 120) federal- and state- listed Threatened, Vulnerable, Of Concern, and Rare plant and animal species and a range of rainforest types.

To achieve restoration of a small (27.6 ha) but important piece of the global distribution of lowland tropical rainforest, RR purchased Lot 46 Cape Tribulation Road in the Daintree area of far north Queensland, Australia in 2010 and, in 2012, secured funding to set the property on its long journey back to rainforest.

The property was partly cleared in the 1960s, first for cattle grazing and later for Oil Palm cultivation. It has a mix of cleared (ca. 11 ha) and early stage natural regeneration (ca. 10ha) areas, bounded on two sides by more intact and mature rainforest (ca. 7 ha). Soils are mostly free-draining sandy clay loams on flat terrain

The on-ground works.  The property was divided into five working Zones as part of the restoration planning process (Fig. 1). Because of a nearby large seed source forest a key objective of the project is to maximise and protect natural regeneration, as well as planting larger openings. Up to 30,000 trees representing 100 species are expected to be planted during the 2-year life of the project, with around 10 ha of natural regeneration interspersed.

Figure 1. Map showing property, work zones (ZONE 1-5), permanent photographic points (Photo point 1-9), location of planting trials (Zones 1 and 2), and primary weed control area (2013) in orange. (Courtesy Google Earth)

Figure 1. Map showing property, work zones (ZONE 1-5), permanent photographic points (Photo point 1-9), location of planting trials (Zones 1 and 2), and primary weed control area (2013) in orange. (Courtesy Google Earth)

Trial tree plantings were undertaken in early 2011 and 2012, and selective weed management (herbicide based grass and soft weed control) began at the same time to optimise natural regeneration prior to identifying and preparing suitable planting sites.

Plantings.  The planting trials were each one hectare in area and designed to test the efficacy of two different high diversity (60-90 species) planting designs. In Zone 1 tree spacing was 2.5m, and in Zone 2 the spacing was 1.5m. Seedlings for rainforest plantings were propagated and grown in the RR nursery in the Daintree lowlands. Seed collection was undertaken north of the Daintree River and included seed collected from the property. A low number of vines were included in the species mix for subsequent plantings.

A total of 90 species have been planted to date. The species mix included some early stage (pioneer type) tree species from genera such as Polyscias (Araliaceae), Alphitonia (Rhamnaceae), Macaranga (Euphorbiaceae) and Commersonia (Malvaceae); and tall fast growing species such as Elaeocarpus grandis (Elaeocarpaceae) and Aleurites moluccana (Euphorbiaceae). The remaining species represented mostly moderately fast growing species, and some slower growing mature phase rainforest species.

Weed control. Where possible, large Oil Palms were removed mechanically, but to protect existing rainforest regeneration many required stem injection with herbicide. Several methods are currently being trialled to determine the most time and cost effective approach to controlling this large and difficult weed.

Late in 2012 and early in 2013 extensive mechanical and chemical weed control was undertaken in Zones 3, 4 and 5 (Fig. 1). This included mechanical clearing of large areas dominated by Giant Bramble (Rubus alceifolius) and other weeds, and some mechanical removal of Oil Palm seedlings on the southern side of the creek that traverses the property (Zones 3 and 4). Follow up chemical control (systematic backpack spraying of glyphosate) was conducted immediately (as required) to complete the site preparation for planting. This was targeted at grasses, broad-leaf weeds, and regrowth of woody weeds.

Monitoring design. Monitoring plots (7 / 50 x 20m plots, each with 10 / 10 x 10m subplots) and permanent photographic points (12 in total, 7 in association with monitoring plots) were established in the five working Zones. Cover, number of species and density will be recorded in these plots at each stratum at 12 month intervals. One monitoring plot was established in each of Zones 1 and 2, three in Zone 3 (including directly adjacent to Zone 4), and two in Zone 5 (in the north of the property; yet to be measured). Zone 4 will be monitored visually and by photo point as it is mostly natural regeneration enhanced by weed control.

Preliminary Results. The first round of project monitoring (year 1 establishment) provided base-line information for future development of the plantings and natural regeneration through assessing canopy cover, leaf litter cover, and a range of other factors that will change over time (Table 1). Informal observations have shown that site dominance was achieved by the trees planted 12 and 18 months ago in Zones 1 and 2.  Substantial numbers of wildling seedlings (of up to 11 species in a plot; and 15 in total) were found in the sites monitored prior to more recent planting.

Mechanical weed control was reported to be extremely effective and the operator was able to minimise damage to existing regrowth of species such as Melicope elleryana (Rutaceae), Glochidion harveyanum var. harveyanum (Phyllanthaceae), Macaranga involucrata var. mallotoides (Euphorbiaceae), Polyscias australiana (Araliaceae), Rhodamnia sessiliflora (Myrtaceae), Alphitonia incana (Rhamnaceae) and Aidia racemosa (Rubiaceae). In combination with the early implementation of broad and targeted spraying this maximised the retention of substantial existing saplings and seedlings.

Project funding will cease in 2014, and control of all weeds and rainforest establishment is expected to be completed in 2015; with only minor weed control required thereafter once canopy cover is established. Monitoring will continue at 12 month intervals and inform future publications.

Acknowledgements: The project is dependent on the generous support of RR donors and the on-going efforts of RR staff in FNQld. Funding for the project was provided by a Federal Government Biodiversity Fund Grant.

Contact:  Robert Kooyman, National Herbarium of NSW, Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust, Mrs Macquaries Road, Sydney 2000 Australia.   Email: robert@ecodingo.com.au;

Figure 2 Mechanical weed control in Zone 3 (January 2013) prior to planting. Note remaining natural regeneration.

Figure 2 Mechanical weed control in Zone 3 (January 2013) prior to planting. Note remaining natural regeneration.

Figure 3. Newly planted trees in Zone 3 (March 2013). Note surrounding natural regeneration.

Figure 3. Newly planted trees in Zone 3 (March 2013). Note surrounding natural regeneration.

Figure 4. Zone 2 planting trial established in late 2011 at 18 months. Tree spacing at 2 - 2.5m.

Figure 4. Zone 2 planting trial established in late 2011 at 18 months. Tree spacing at 2 – 2.5m.

Table 1.  Synthesis of baseline data for natural regeneration, and progress (including planting) up to February 2013 measured on (50 x 20m) permanent monitoring plots (PP), in Zones (1,2,3), by Themes (1 – planting; 2 – natural regeneration). PD – total planted diversity on plot; PS(n) – number of seedling planted on plot; WS – wildling seedlings (0.5-1m in height); WD – wildling diversity; Av. CC(%) – Average Canopy Cover (%); Av. L(%) – Average Litter Cover (%); Av. LBC(%) – Average Log-Branch Cover (%); Av. PCHt – Average planted canopy height (m); dbh – diameter at breast height (1.3m); NR – Number of stems, natural regeneration >1cm DBH; NR-div – Diversity of natural regeneration >1cm DBH; Age (mths) – Age of planting in months. Zone 4 (not shown) has permanent photo points and visual monitoring.

PP Zone Theme PD PS(n) WS WD Av.CC(%) Av.L(%) Av.LBC(%) Av. PCHt NR NR-div Age(m)

1

3

1, 2

82

424

236

7

27.5

52

7

0.6 – 1

218

12

1

2

3

1, 2

0

0

587

11

41

61.5

6.7

NA

248

11

0

3

3

1, 2

0

0

133

5

18.5

48.8

4.6

NA

109

9

0

4

2

1

85

390

45

7

13

30.6

3

1-2m

45

5

12

5

1

1

85

207

95

5

45.5

58

5

2-3m

48

7

18

Appendix 1 List of main weed species located and treated on the property.

Common Name Species Family Life Form
Sanchezia Sanchezia parvibracteata Acanthaceae herb
Brillantaisia Brillantaisia lamium Acanthaceae herb
Goosefoot Syngonium podophyllum Araceae vine
Toothed Philodendron Philodendron lacerum Araceae climber
Oil Palm Elaeis guineensis Arecaceae palm
Dracaeana Dracaeana fragans Asparagaceae small tree
Sensitive Plant Mimosa pudica Fabaceae creeper
Calopo Calopogonium mucunoides Fabaceae creeper
 Green Summer Grass Urochloa decumbens Poaceae grass
Giant Bramble Rubus alceifolius Rosaceae scrambler
Snake Weed Stachytarpheta cayennensis Verbenaceae herb

Restoration after pipeline installation: Pimpama Northern Gold Coast, Queensland.

Key words: Assisted natural regeneration, topsoil transfer, Wallum Froglet, Regional Ecosystem 12.3.5, pipeline construction.

Mark Bibby

Revegetation works were carried out in 2009-10 to accompany a civil construction project in the northern Gold Coast, Queensland, where a pipeline was being laid through a natural area.

The Regional Ecosystems on site included palustrine wetland (12.3.5), which is habitat for threatened flora species including Phaius australis, P. bernaysii and Schoenus scabripes and the Wallum Froglet (Crinia tinnula).

The goals of the project were to: reinstate vegetation on site after the construction of the pipeline; minimise weed establishment and other maintenance issues; to ensure that no canopy species were replaced over pipes (to avoid root damage to the pipes); and to achieve an optimal  outcome for local biodiversity, including the Wallum Froglet.

Summary of works.  The native vegetation in the path of the pipeline was removed from wet areas with excavators and a crew of regenerators (Figs 1a and 1b). As much as possible of the macrophyte vegetation from the watercourse area was temporarily moved to ‘holding’ trenches, created to allow for a variety of soil moisture levels. (These were lined with plastic and then filled with water).

Some 600 specimens of other plants were removed to a nursery for later replanting. The top 200 mm of topsoil and site litter from the remainder of the site were stripped and stockpiled on site for later replacement.

Fig 1a: Macrophyte holding trenches before replanting.

Fig 1b: Macrophyte holding trenches providing temporary habitat during works.

Following civil works (conducted 8 months after the topsoil stripping) the stored topsoil and litter was replaced (at 30-50mm depth) and plants from the holding trenches replanted in their original positions. Spaces were left between the patches of litter to allow for regeneration from the replaced topsoil. Stumps were replaced on site as habitat.

The 600 nursery-spelled plants were reinstated on site and further planting of tubestock was undertaken, with grasses and sedges translocated from nearby at the site. Seed was collected nearby and spread on site when available. The site was regularly visited by skilled bush regeneration weed control staff members for 12 months.

Results. A high level success was achieved with the translocation of holding trench stock following inundation of the site during summer rains.  After replacement of the topsoil, vegetation and litter, the watercourse and surrounding fringes established well and natural regeneration from the replaced topsoil and germination from the seed dispersed by hand occurred. One year after the completion of works, the site was recovering well (Fig 2a-c) and recent inspections showed that vegetation cover and diversity in the watercourse area is consistent with the pre clearing condition. The terrestrial restoration area is showing good recovery with 15 species (that were not planted on site) observed regenerating. The native to weed ratio is 9:1. Conversely in the area of disturbance (adjacent the project site) without restoration the native to weed ratio is 1:9.

Fig 2a: The watercourse after removal of the vegetation.

Fig 2b: The watercourse upon reinstallation of topsoil and stockpiled plants

Fig 2c: The watercourse after the completion of the contract.

Lessons learned.  The joy of this project was being able to convince the the civil engineers if not also ecologists that a more natural regeneration-style approach could offer preferable outcomes to a standard civil landscaping approach.  Particularly interesting was the need to convince them not to be afraid of some short term ‘mess’ to ensure a good result for a natural area.

Contact: Mark Bibby, Gecko Regen, / 139 Duringan Street,Currumbin, Qld, Australia. Tel:  +61 (7) 5534 6395. Email: admin@geckoregen.org.au ; http://www.geckoregen.org.au/

Kirra Dune Revegetation – Queensland.

Key words.  Dune reconstruction, strand ecosystem,

Mark Bibby

A project was developed in 2009 to remove sand from the intertidal area at Kirra to form a new series of dunes along a 1.5km stretch of beach from Kirra to Bilinga, on the far south coast of Queensland (Fig 1).  While the purpose was to maintain the beach amenity and reinforce a buffer to the shoreline, the reconstruction of the dunes (to an average height of 4 metres and the width v from 25 to 60 metres) also involved reinstating native plant communities along the dunes for stabilisation and the conservation of biodiversity.

Fig 1: Project area – 1.5km stretch of beach from Kirra to Bilinga, Queensland.

Revegetation was conducted in the frontal dune area of the project site and in strategically placed infill planting cells between the frontal dune and the existing vegetation landward edge of the project site (Fig 2). Four locally occurring dune species were selected: Spinifex (Spinifex hirsutus) 65%; Beach Bean (Canavalia rosea) 5%; Goats Foot Convolvulus (Ipomoea pes-caprae) 15%; and Vigna (Vigna marina) 15%.

Fig 2: Revegetation of the dune system using infill planting cells and four locally occurring plant species (April 2011).

For a 12 week period the plants were monitored and watered with a 25,000L capacity off-road truck, with plants replaced as required. The site was then maintained for a period of twelve months post-planting to promote good growth of installed plants, prevent weed incursion, ensure dune stability through increased native vegetation cover and assist natural regeneration of dune species.

The total length of the planting area is 1515m and  approximately 18,000 tubestock were planted out over an area of 18000m2 by a team of 6, who planted a total average of 4500 plants per day.

Results. Planting survival rates varied mainly due to mobile sand and anthropogenic disturbance. Good rainfall over the installation period and for 4 weeks following planting ensured establishment was successful (Fig 3).

Fig 3: Revegetation of dune system 5 months after works (Sept 2011)

At 12 months after the planting on the foredune, Beach Spinifex (Spinifex sericeus) densities are approaching, or in some areas have reached, densities expected for a naturally established frontal dune (Fig 4). Since planting, the nursery-spelled Beach Spinifex have flowered and seeded, however the bulk of the increase in biomass is due to extension of the runners. Beach Spinifex runners have travelled in all directions across the dune (i.e. including up inclines). Small swales of windswept sand can be seen captured in front of Beach Spinifex. Of the three species planted on the frontal dune, Beach Spinifex (overall) has shown the greatest increase in area covered.

Fig 4: Revegetation of dune system 12 months after works (April 2012).

The other two species Vigna (Vigna marina) and Beach Morning Glory (Ipomoea pes-caprae) have also done well, although not increased their biomass as rapidly as the Spinifex. The plants, however, have had a good survival rate and throughout December to April 2012 have seen an increase in their rate of growth. Based on the slower (compared to the Spinifex) growth rates that both the Vigna and the Beach Morning Glory exhibited throughout the establishment period either:

(a) they naturally require more time to establish;

(b) their growth rate throughout winter months is less than Spinifex;

(c) they are more sensitive to wind-blown sand than the Spinifex; or

(d) a combination of factors.

Growth rate, however, was not a specific metric that influenced the decision to include these species in the revegetation species selection; the primary reason for their inclusion was to increase in situ species richness in the mid- to long term. Based on this, their inclusion has been successful. As mentioned previously they are now growing more rapidly and both species have flowered and produced seed.

Runners are beginning to connect the infill planting cells with the frontal dune row plantings. In addition to the three species used in the frontal dune plantings, Beach Bean (Canavalia rosea) was also included. The establishment, growth and survivorship of Beach Bean has been similar to that of Vigna — a period where growth appeared minimal and then more rapid growth throughout summer 2011/2012.

Overall survival rate is approximately 80%, however survival rate of individual plants is probably not the best measure of success for a project of this nature. Percentage cover or biomass is a more appropriate measure. Despite this, whichever measure of success is chosen the project has met and exceeded requirements.

Plant abundance and vegetative cover are very good to excellent. Combined with the species composition (richness) many areas of the frontal dune are indistinguishable from a naturally occurring frontal dune. The plants are reproducing and increasing their abundance; at this point predominantly vegetatively (i.e. ‘runners’) however all species have produced seed and these could reasonably be expected to add to the plant population.

The plants are well established and (in the absence of any extreme natural events or destruction by intent) self-sustaining.

Lessons learned.  Beach Spinifex (Spinifex sericeus) is a rapid colonizer of frontal dunes and was the first of the four planted species to reinforce a buffer for the newly created dunes.

The largest threats against successful establishment are:

  • Anthropogenic disturbance through the planting establishment area. This resulted in breaking the ‘crust’ that forms on the top of semi-stable sand, making the underlying sand more susceptible to erosion.
  • Sandblow that covers or undermines plants in the first few months post planting.

Because the sand was “sterile” (due to it having been reclaimed from the intertidal zone and lacking a seed bank), weed invasion, up to this point, has been minimal. This may suggest that weeds predominantly recolonise natural dunes due to accumulated seeds and other propagules persistent in the sand.

Stakeholders: The Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) has been responsible for the project management of the Kirra Beach Restoration Project. The Gold Coast City Council (GCCC) is a key stakeholder and the primary service provider for the works.

Contact: Mark Bibby, Gecko Regen, / 139 Duringan Street,Currumbin, Qld, Australia. Tel:  +61 (7) 5534 6395. Email: admin@geckoregen.org.au ; http://www.geckoregen.org.au/

More than a decade of bush regeneration at the Wootha Nature Refuge

Key words: Rainforest restoration, assisted regeneration, Nature Refuge, bush regeneration industry funding models

Spencer Shaw

Rainforest restoration work has been carried out at Wootha Nature Refuge since the property was purchased by its current landholder in the early 2000s.

The property, located on the Blackall Range in the Sunshine Coast region of south east Queensland,  contains a mix of pasture on the higher gently sloping ground and remnant rainforest community (Regional Ecosystem 12.8.3) on the escarpment below the range. When works started on this site the rainforest was highly fragmented, with Lantana (Lantana camara) dominating the gullies and patches of Broad-leaved Privet (Ligustrum lucidum) dominating the areas between the rainforest patches. 

Figure 1. Landscape context, Wootha NR is on the southern slopes of the Blackall Range. Greater than 90% of the plateau vegetation has been cleared.

The landholder has undertaken substantial restoration works, complementing his formal protection of the remnant and restoration areas under in-perpetuity agreements with both Local and State Governments (through a Voluntary Conservation Agreement (VCA) and Nature Refuge (NR)).

Works undertaken. Works have been undertaken by Brush Turkey Enterprises since 2002 on a monthly to fortnightly basis for the whole of the last decade. 

The initial control works consisted of the poisoning Broad-leaved Privet in-situ for a 500m strip along the western boundary. The technique employed for control of the Broad-leaved Privet early in the project was “frill & paint” (i.e. stem injection). This was undertaken with a small axe cutting 100mm wide cuts into the bark and allowing 100mm spacing, covering two full circumferences of each tree trunk. Herbicide was applied via a squirt bottle of 1:1 glyphosate 360 and water. Our contemporary control technique is a modification of this technique using small arbor chainsaws. 

Figure 2. Lantana camara control in gullies 2005.

Subsequent contract Bush Regeneration works have been relatively low key over the last 10 years, with as little as eight Bush Regenerator days per year – and have focused on the control of Lantana in the gullies to control exotic vegetation and facilitate rainforest pioneer recruitment.  Lantana control has been undertaken using the “track and overspray” technique. Tracks are cut with both brushcutters or fern hooks and glyphosate 360 herbicide is applied by backpack sprayers at a 1:100 dilution with water. Lantana works are preferably undertaken in winter months, due to access difficulties.

Results. Regeneration in the areas previously dominated by Broad-leaved Privet was rapid.  Many species recruited to re-establish a diverse native edge to the rainforest remnant areas; including rare species such as the Threadybark Myrtle (Gossia inophloia).

Approximately 2 ha of Lantana in the gullies have been replaced by naturally regenerating vegetation including species such as as Bleeding Heart (Homalanthus nutans), Black Wattle (Acacia melanoxylon) and Giant Stinging Tree (Dendrocnide excelsa).

Figure 3. Dendrocnide excelsa recruitment. Also shows Basalt scree slopes which dominate this part of the escarpment.

Lessons learned. Until the early 2000s all funding for ecological restoration works in South-east Queensland were linked to ‘trees planted’, and only allowed for revegetation projects. The novel approach taken by the funding program that the works were initially supported by was to require recipients to quantify ‘trees established’ rather than ‘trees planted’ and it also considered eligible, projects that used natural regeneration as a revegetation method.  As such, the Wootha project was the first in our area to employ bush regenerators to facilitate natural regeneration of native ecosystems.

We consider this project to be a good example of what can happen if there is consistency of follow up undertaken (even if limited) over a long time period.  Too often projects undertake the ‘primary’ clearing of a site but undertake little or no ‘secondary’ or follow-up work.  Although relatively minor annual works take place on this site, the ongoing nature of the funding for this project and hands on involvement by the landholder provides for the steady and incremental restoration of the rainforest. This is achieving actual and long-term success.

Acknowledgements. Funding for our works came initially through the SE QLD Rainforest Recovery Project and later through the VCA with Sunshine Coast Regional Council. The project would not have occurred or succeeded without the landholder’s dedication to both rainforest conservation and the bush regeneration industry in SE Queensland.

Contact: Spencer Shaw, Brush Turkey Enterprises (Natural Area Management), P.O. Box 326, Maleny, QLD Australia 4552; Tel: +61 7 5494 3642 or Mob: 0428 130 769; Email: spencer.shaw@brushturkey.com.au; Web: www.brushturkey.com.au

Restoring grassy understorey under Forest Red Gum – Wolston Creek Bushland Reserve, Riverhills, Queensland

Key words: grassy understorey, assisted natural regeneration, Bushcare, Green Panic.

Carole Bristow and Julie Vejle

Wolston Creek Bushland Reserve, is a 47 ha Brisbane City Council (BCC) Bushcare Site at Riverhills, in the south-west outskirts of Brisbane, Queensland. Although only a relatively small area of bushland remains, connectivity is provided by Wolston Creek, its tributaries Sandy and Bullockhead Creeks and the banks of the Brisbane River.

This report is about just one of the plant communities that the Bushcare group (a handful of dedicated locals) is working on: a 1.55 hectare patch of Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) forest with a grassy understorey (Fig 1).

Fig 1 (a) Understorey of Eucalyptus tereticornis forest at Wolston Creek Bushland Reserve showing a typical swathe of Green Panic before treatment

In mid-2008 when the project commenced, the understorey of the forest was virtually entirely dominated by the exotic grass Green Panic (Megathyrsus maximus var. pubiglumis) due to past clearing and the sowing of pasture grasses for grazing.   However, as there were some native grasses still evident, we wondered whether the site might respond to an assisted natural regeneration approach that has worked on other sites.   Out of curiosity, we cleared Green Panic by hand around a patch of native grasses to give them space to expand. In the process we found that, under the cover of the Green Panic, were struggling native grasses, sedges and wisps of herbs (Fig 2). This then became a test patch, which in turn became a stand of Pitted Bluegrass (Bothriochloa decipiens). The outstanding results energised us to continue.

Fig 2 (a) Much of the site started with very small native germinants which would have been inadvertently killed had the site been sprayed with herbicide. Photo (a) shows how few natives were sometimes initially revealed – in this case Whisker Sedge (Cyperus gracilis), Common Bindweed (Polymeria calycina) and native Glycine sp.

Our treatments. We further cleared the  Green Panic using mattocks. With the weed cover much reduced, rains brought a massive annual weed response.  We considered spot spraying but while the seedbank response was still being discovered, every native plant was important, so the enthusiasm was there to increase hand weeding on an extended basis. To cope with the volume of hand weeding required, removal was aimed mainly at weed individuals that were flowering and/or seeding.  The result was a gradual reduction of weeds and maintenance of a microclimate for germinating natives.

As this site matured and produced such a vigorous response from natives, it became possible to consider other techniques. In January 2009, an adjacent area was slashed by BCC  to prevent Green Panic from seeding into the work area. By May, with good rains, the slashed area had produced a resurgence of natives, so BCC was asked to stop slashing.  We mattocked out the Green Panic crowns, increasing the original work area by 50%.  We realised that slashing several times proved to be a good preparation for primary weeding.  With the Green Panic tops cut and largely decomposed, the pattern of natives and weeds was better revealed and allowed light to trigger germination and growth.

Subsequently, it was found that initial ‘overspraying’ (taking care to spray the standing Green Panic only) produced a similar response.

Results.  Compared with the former near-monoculture of Green Panic, the ground stratum now has abundant native cover comprising: 18 species of native grasses; two sedges; 19 forbs; one shrub; five twiners, and both Forest Red Gum and Maiden’s Wattle (Acacia maidenii) are regenerating.

The area treated within the first year (250 m2) has now been expanded to 1.55 ha.  Of this, 30% can be considered on ‘maintenance’ i.e. stable native cover, requiring minimal visits for the occasional weeds.  A further 65% is undergoing secondary treatment (still requiring regular work to bring it to ‘maintenance’ stage) and about 5% has undergone primary treatment in 2012.

Lessons learned:
1. It is important to try several patches when testing the resilience of a site.  In our case, making a judgement based on one patch of slow response could have caused misinterpretation of the whole site. (Indeed, areas of slow response eventually filled in and helped to create the diverse mosaic of the ground stratum.)
2. Where appropriate, consider slashing/brushcutting/or spraying weedy grasses as preparation for (or initial phase of) primary weeding in areas that have been found to have strong resilience.
3. Try to view the post-primary weed flush (which often appears to be a ‘sea’ of annual weeds)  as part of the recovery process rather than become overwhelmed by it.  The gradual removal of weed still provides protection for germinating natives.
4. Remove weeds before they seed; keep maintenance stage as the goal;  expand the work area in small steps.  (We were lulled into a false sense of success in dry periods, and possibly expanded too quickly.  So we’ve learned to hasten slowly.)
5.  Plant identification is all important. At the start of the project, the main plant we needed to know was Green Panic. In the continual task of sorting weeds from natives, we remind ourselves that ‘If in doubt, don’t pull it out’.  When a plant is found that we don’t know, it is time to take the interesting journey to the Queensland Herbarium.

The main contributing factors to the success so far have been:
The people: curious; persistent; patient; willing to learn from our mistakes; learning to work with nature’s cycles.
The site: has a strong seedbank that was triggered when rains came and its widely spaced trees made it suitable for preparatory slashing.
The motivation:  the reward and excitement of seeing a native plant community build in integrity and diversity.

We anticipate that there is .5 ha yet to treat. Long term success therefore depends upon the continuation of the above factors and continued support from Brisbane City Council.

Acknowledgements.  Brisbane City Council Habitat Brisbane Section, Wolston Creek Bushcare Group, Queensland Herbarium

Contacts:  Wolston Creek Bushcare Group: For more information, email info@wacc.org.au

Natural and cultural resource management – The aspirations of the traditional custodians of the Bunya Mountains

Key words:  Araucaria bidwilii, Bunya, fire,  South East Queensland, traditional custodians

David Calland

Prior to colonisation, the Bunya Mountains was a place of large gatherings of the Aboriginal people of South East Queensland for the ‘Bonye Bonye’ festival; a time of feasting, ceremony, trading, betrothals and the settling of disputes. In years when there were heavy crops of the nutritious bunya nuts (from the native Bunya Pine, Araucaria bidwilii), invitations from custodians went out to groups towards the coast and to people as far away as the Clarence River in northern NSW and the Maranoa River over 350k to the west. Festivals took place from December to March and the last big recorded gathering was in the 1880s.

In August 2008 the first of a series of Stakeholder Forums were held on the Bunya Mountains of SE Queensland to discuss natural and cultural resource management issues and to explore ways for the Murri people of South East Queensland to become more actively involved in planning, research and on ground management of lands in the Bunya Mountains region.
Traditional Custodians from about twelve groups met with scientists, Government and Non Government Organisations and business representatives and as a result the Bunya Partnership Coordination Group (BPCG) and the Bunya Elders Council were formed to create Natural and Cultural Resource Management opportunities for Traditional Custodians.

Stakeholders on Mt Kiangarow (1126m).

Australian Government funding was secured to develop a Caring for Our Country Action Plan for the Bunya Mountains. The plan was published in late 2010.

In September 2009, a bid to the Australian Government for the Working on Country program was successful. This project is called the Bunya Mountains Murri Ranger Project. The project has employed 4 Indigenous Rangers, a Coordinator Ranger and a part time Administrative Assistant. The group is working collaboratively with Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service on the Bunya Mountains National Park and the Western Downs Regional Council on Russell Park.

The Bunya Mountains support a unique assemblage of plants, animals and ecosystems and have been likened to an island of biodiversity surrounded by an ocean of plains of mainly cleared farmland. They are a biodiversity refuge, harbouring ancient species, distinct plant and animal communities and more than 30 rare and threatened species.

One hundred and nineteen grasslands, known locally as “balds”, are dotted across the Bunya Mountains. These balds have important cultural significance as they were maintained by traditional burning practice.

The first traditional burn in 100 years; Bunya Murri Rangers 2010.

A large component of the project involves the management of fire on the grasslands through experimental burns of varying frequencies and intensities. Researchers and rangers are working to find the right fire regimes to maintain the open character and species diversity of the balds before they are lost forever.

Contact: Dave Calland, Natural Resource Officer -Indigenous Engagement, Department of Environment and Resource Management. PO Box 573, Nambour Qld 4560, Australia.  Tel: +61 4 5451 2401 Mob: 0427 427246, Email: david.calland@derm.qld.gov.au

Three action research projects: (i)Traditional Knowledge Revival Pathways Fire Program, (ii)Kuku Thaypan Fire Management Research Project and (iii)the Importance of Campfires to Effective Conservation – Cape York Peninsula Australia

Key words: Traditional ecological knowledge, natural resource management, Indigenous research, Indigenous training, fire management

Location and purpose of the projects. Kuku-Thaypan (Awu Laya) country is part of the Cape York bio-geographical region, Cook Shire, North Queensland.  Every year, areas of Cape York Peninsula burn through prescribed and uncontrolled fire in the late dry and storm seasons.  Although increasing, little burning generally occurs throughout the early dry season. The effect of fire on the environment is under study through a number of research initiatives including the Traditional Knowledge Revival Pathways (TKRP), the Kuku Thaypan Fire Management Research project (KTFMRP) and the “Importance of Campfires to effective conservation research”.  However, it is clear that more recent fire regimes are different to those practiced by traditional Indigenous land managers and that these more recent fire regimes do not ensure the maintenance of native vegetation communities that require specific fire management regimes or protection from fire.

Victor Steffensen Mulong Director with participants at 2011 TKRP fire workshop

Fig 1. Victor Steffensen Mulong Director with participants at 2011 TKRP fire workshop on Kuku Thaypan Country sand bank at Gno Coom – Saxby Lagoon – principal study site for the TKRP KTFMRP and The Importance of Campfires 2004-2011.

Prior to European occupation, for example, fire management in Kuku Thaypan country was carried out throughout the year for a variety of purposes. Traditional owners tended different ecosystems with burn regimes at different times of year and actively managed country to keep fire out. Various scales of between and within ecosystem burning resulted. Each implemented action undertaken in response to a suite of cultural and environmental indicators.

In order to understand the significance of Mo (fire) for Kuku Thaypan people it is necessary to recognise that every square inch of Kuku Thaypan country is embedded with cultural meaning, that their exists interconnectivity between all things; and that all things are animate and sentient. Fire is sacred and as such its use brings great responsibility. Fire maps have been developed for Early season, Dry season and Storm season fires over a ten year period from 2000 to 2010.
What we are doing. The TKRP, KTFMRP and the “Importance of Campfires to effective conservation research” projects have actively supported the ambitions of two senior Kuku Thaypan Elders, Dr. Tommy George and the late Dr. George Musgrave since 2004. The Indigenous Elders wanted to demonstrate the benefits of their fire knowledge, practically implementing fire to heal country while teaching others and recording it for generations to come and as such initiated their KTFMRP. This was the Elders’ response to seeing their country burnt “too hot, at the wrong time and in the wrong places.” Every year since 2004, the programs have  undertaken successful on-country Indigenous led and centered co-generative action research and training programs focused on fire management.

Peta Standley TKRP KTFMRP co-researcher

Fig 2. Peta Standley TKRP KTFMRP co-researcher working with 2011 workshop participants undertaking monitoring at a non-TEK burn site.

Achievements to date. The evolution of this work has led to the development of the TKRP Indigenous Fire training program in 2010 and the description of a research practitioner model for “integration” of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in contemporary resource management with a focus on fire and biodiversity. The TKRP fire program is educating both Indigenous and non-Indigenous natural resource management practitioners and researchers from diverse communities across Australia in Traditional fire management and research practices derived from the recordings and teachings of the two Kuku Thaypan Elders. In each new community that engages with the program, TEK and western science fire and biodiversity knowledge is being shared, invigorated and co-generated through on-country action.

Dr. Tommy George

Fig 3. Dr. Tommy George monitoring the 2011 Fire Workshop on Kuku Thaypan country

Significance. The benefits of the program are not just for country, but also for people. The TKRP Indigenous research methodology embodies an ancient way to undertake cultural practice, where the right people have a voice to ensure that interactions with country and people are undertaken according to protocol, kinship and lore. This Indigenous methodology and the CAMPFIRES research practitioner model, applied in co-generation, have created unified ways to do research and culturally appropriate ways to bring Indigenous knowledge of fire and biodiversity into contemporary environment and resource management. Together they have worked with others on multiple pathways for engagement between TEK holders and western science knowledge holders that have been culturally relevant and naturally benefited country and community. One of the pathways is the Indigenous led participatory action research project – “Threats to Native Bees (Sugarbag)” which was initiated and led by the Indigenous participants.

Acknowledgements. Partners in the project include Mulong TKRP, James Cook University, and CSIRO.  Thanks go to the funding agencies, partners and supporters of the projects over the last eight years.

Contact: Peta-Marie Standley, Program manager, Cape York Natural Resource Management Ltd, CSIRO Atherton. PO Box 907, Atherton Q 4883, Australia. Tel: 0418 198 244, Email: pstandley@capeyorknrm.com.au

Threats to Native Bees (Sugarbag) Project – one of the pathways of the Traditional Knowledge Revival Pathways Kuku Thaypan Fire Management Program

Key words: Traditional ecological knowledge, native stingless bees, Trigonia sp., Indigenous training, fire management

The project and its aims: From February to April 2010 the Kuku Thaypan Fire Management Research Project through the Elders’ Traditional Knowledge Revival Pathways (TKRP) in Cape York, North Queensland – extended their Indigenous led action research methodology to begin implementation of the “Threats to Native Bees (Sugarbag)” project.

One aim of this project was to design a methodology for mapping bee nesting sites (“sugarbag”) using both Traditional and non-traditional knowledge systems. Another was to assess the potential usefulness of stingless bees Trigonia sp as an indicator of biodiversity health in Woodlands.

Outputs of the action research project included two short trailers, a short case study film and a CD Rom Powerpoint Presentation outlining the project.

Shared elements of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) )and western science on sugarbag management issues affecting stingless bees included inter-relationships with flowering events and fire timing, frequency and intensity.

The final short film acts to communicate the project as a case study presenting key elements of the relationship between stingless bees, sugarbag, people and fire, while practically demonstrating land management from a grassroots community perspective.

The CD Rom Powerpoint presentation highlights key elements of the project methodology, method, challenges, achievements and findings and begins to describe the classification system as recorded by TEK and western science through the project.

Lessons learned. The potency of the training tools is that they enhance on-country training methods as they re-enforce the experience and recollection of country as close as possible to actually being there, triggering reliving of the knowledge exchange that encompasses deeper learning.

The Sugarbag project has directly assisted communities by demonstrating a structure where transfer in Traditional Knowledge occurs through culturally appropriate means. Undertaking TEK transfer in the field, while practically demonstrating knowledge through action research case studies and training in multi-media tools, provides a diverse number of outcomes beneficial to the environment and community well-being. This methodology directly empowers communities because they are implementing their own projects and control how information is shared across Australia and abroad.

Acknowledgements. Partners to the Sugarbag research project were Mulong Pty, Ltd, The Importance of Campfires Research Project, Caring for Our Country Open Grants, James Cook University Australian Tropical Forest Institute Centre for Sustainable Indigenous Communities, Charles Darwin University.

Contact: Peta-Marie Standley, Program manager, Cape York Natural Resource Management Ltd, CSIRO Atherton. PO Box 907, Atherton Q 4883, Australia. Tel: 0418 198 244, Email: pstandley@capeyorknrm.com.au

Eels on Wheels – An evaluation of the trap-and-transfer method of Long-finned Eel (Anguilla reinhardtii) at the Ross River Dam, Townsville

Key words: fish barriers, fish passage, migration, fishways, eels, Anguilla reinhardtii

Carla Hutchinson-Reade

Freshwater eels, like many other species, need to migrate to and from marine environments to complete their lifecycle. Throughout Australia large dams are restricting the migration success of native eels contributing to the overall decline of eel numbers. NQ Dry Tropics (the natural resource management body for north Queensland’s dry tropics) is conducting a project focused on removing fish barriers which will help to reverse this trend. An Eels on Wheels device is a simple yet effective method that can be employed in many locations that are impassable to eels. The device facilitates upstream migration of eels during the early stage of their lifecycle.

NQ Dry Tropics commissioned a study Eel passage over large dams of their catchment region in the dry tropics in Queensland, Australia. During the study no eels were recorded above the Burdekin Falls Dam while many were recorded below. This suggested a very real problem. The study identified the Ross River Dam as a major barrier to the Long-finned Eel (Anguilla reinhardtii), as several thousand elvers were observed attempting upstream migration by climbing dam wall abutments without success.

Elvers scale the blue netting up the sheer wall to get to the Astro Turf

To overcome this barrier an eel trap-and-transfer trial was established on 17 December 2010 prior to wet season rainfalls. (Local knowledge of previous migration history gave NQ Dry Tropics insight into migration events.) Since then around 3000 upstream migrants have been captured using a custom-designed trap we call Eels on Wheels and safely relocated within 48 hours. Trapping went on for 3 months.

Entry ramp lined with Astro Turf leads to a modified wheelie bin. The bin is filled with water and contains a live adult eel whose scent attracts elvers. The bin is then wheeled by project staff to the upstream side of the barrier.

The trap consists of a wheelie bin fitted with an Astro Turf-lined entry ramp which delivers a flow attraction fed from the upstream storage. The main drivers for trapping success and retention are in the level of attraction flow and trap accessibility. Once the elvers are in the wheelie bin they are transported and released by the project staff on the upstream side of the barrier. The Eels on Wheels device is a low cost and effective option to assist eels to overcome dam barriers. The same device can be replicated by natural resource managers around the country.

Contact: Paul Duncanson, NQ Dry Tropics (07) 4724 3544 or email paul.duncanson@nqdrytropics.com.au