Category Archives: Citizen science

Bridging the Gaps: Community Created Post-Storm Fauna Crossings

Key words. Wildlife bridge, habitat creation, storm recovery, forest management,  Fauna canopy bridge

Joanne Isaac

Figure 1. Bridge creation workshop at primary school. © ERA

Introduction. In June 2021, severe storms impacted large areas of the state of Victoria, Australia. A number of forested areas important for their biodiversity were damaged including the Yarra Ranges National Park, and Wombat State Forest – much of which is designated to become a national park in 2030.

The strong winds associated with the storms resulted in severe windthrow and wind-snap of trees, with many thousands of trees impacted and large areas of canopy lost across the forests.

The Wombat State Forest has a unique arboreal marsupial fauna, including the most south-westerly population of the endangered Southern Greater Glider (Petauroides volans) in Australia, and other threatened and declining arboreal species including the Brush-tailed Phascogale (Phascogale tapoatafa) and Eastern Pygmy-Possum (Cercartetus nanus). In addition, the area is home to more common species, such as Brush-tailed Possums (Trichosurus spp.) and Ring-tailed possums (Pseudocheirus peregrinus) which are important within the food chain for predators including Powerful Owl (Ninox strenua).

Areas of severe windthrow and canopy loss represent a substantial movement barrier to arboreal marsupials, most of whom prefer not to come to the ground where they are at risk of predation by cats and foxes, and potentially also car collision.

One possible temporary solution is fauna canopy rope bridges. Canopy bridges are often used in road projects when a road bisects habitat. Studies across Australia have demonstrated that a wide range of species will utilise these canopy bridges, including Ring-tailed Possums (Pseudocheirus spp.) and Leadbeater’s Possum (Gymnobelideus leadbeateri). Birds are also often recorded using bridges as perches.

However, pre-made canopy bridge can be extremely expensive, and cost prohibitive for many conservation projects which have limited funds available. In this project, we developed a simple technique to create temporary, biodegradable, fauna rope bridges for installation in storm-impacted habitat in the Wombat State Forest. We partnered with the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA) and multiple local councils to involve the local community in workshops to create sections of bridge, which were then installed in strategic locations across the forest.

Preliminary works. Our team began by developing a simple method of rope bridge creation based on published accounts of pre-made fauna bridges. Unlike fauna bridges in road projects, these bridges were made to be temporary – to only last as long as it takes for the canopy to re-grow. As such, we chose natural sisal rope, which is biodegradable, but more resistant to ultraviolet light and wet than other natural rope such as manila.

In addition, we developed a method of attachment to standing trees which does not require additional infrastructure, and which also allows easy adjustment of attachment ropes to ensure host trees are not impacted into the future.

A prototype bridge was installed and monitored using a remote wildlife camera in order to test the design for suitability; within one week Krefft’s Glider (Petaurus notatus) were recorded using the bridge, and a number of birds used it as a perch.

Together with local councils, community events were organized in a variety of indoor and outdoor venues for rope bridge making workshops. These were advertised on social media and individual council websites.

Sections of bridge, approximately 10 meters long, were created by the community during workshops using a simple knotting technique (Fig. 1).

Bridges were installed in strategic locations in storm-damaged forest, determined through liaison on with the relevant local council and DEECA. Installations were completed by professional arborists (Fig. 2); sections of bridge were woven together and secured in order to create the required length for the installation site.

Figure 2. Bridge installation. © ERA

In the past year, more than 300m of rope bridge has been created as a result of these projects and four bridges have been installed in the Yarra Ranges area, and four in the Wombat State Forest area (Fig. 3). A number of bridges are being monitored using Reconyx cameras and three cameras on Hepburn Council bridges.

0Figure 3. Bridge following installation in the Wombat State Forest. © ERA.A variety of species have already been recorded using the rope bridges, including Feather-tailed gliders (Acrobates spp.) and Eastern Ring-tailed possums (Fig. 4), and birds including Crimson Rosella (Playcercus elegans) and Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae) are using them as perches.

Figure 4. Ring-tailed Possum using a bridge in the Wombat State Forest. © ERA.

More bridges are planned for installation in the near future. We are currently also undertaking experiments to determine the lifespan of sisal rope in the environment, and decomposition rates.

Preliminary Results. Calculations estimate that the cost was around $20 per meter of completed rope bridge, as compared to upwards of $200 per meter for pre-made bridge. In terms of community engagement and involvement, a wide variety of individuals and groups attended workshops and made bridges. Local Scout groups and schools and the Youth Justice Centre were also involved. Preliminary results from a questionnaire indicate that participants welcomed the opportunity to contribute to helping the environment, and all participants would attend another workshop in the future.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies. The project has been funded by DEECA, Yarra Ranges and Hepburn Shire Councils. Its partners are Hepburn, Macedon Ranges and Moorabool Shire Councils, and Eco Warriors Australia. Ecology & Restoration Australia is supported by the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action, Yarra Ranges Council, Macedon Ranges Shire Council, Hepburn Shire Council, Moorabool Shire Council, and Eco Warriors Australia.

Contact information. Dr Jo Isaac, Principal Ecologist, Ecology & Restoration Australia, 10 View Street, Avonsleigh, Vic, 0459403286, jo.isaac@eraus.com.au

See also: video made by Yarra Ranges Council who recently promoted the project funded by themselves https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Yc_nqLrdg

Beyond the 1990s, beyond Iluka – koalas and citizen science – UPDATE of EMR summary

Daniel Lunney, Lisa O’Neill, Alison Matthews, Dionne Coburn and Chris Moon

[Update of EMR summary – Lunney, Daniel, Lisa O’Neill, Alison Matthews and Dionne Coburn ( 2000) “Contribution of community knowledge of vertebrate fauna to management and planning. Ecological Management & Restoration, 1:3, . 175-184. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1442-8903.2000.00036.x]

Key words: national parks, SEPP 44, adaptive management, social criteria, extinction, wildlife survey, coastal forests.

Figure 1. Interest in local wildlife among residents and visitors to the north coast village of Iluka was growing in the 1990s, providing an opportunity for community involvement in our wildlife survey designed not only to gain information but to raise awareness. (Photo Dan Lunney 1991.)

Introduction. Our EMR feature published in 2000 reported on research that commenced in 1997 when we set out to identify the species and locations of the vertebrate fauna of Iluka peninsula, at the mouth of the Clarence River NSW, Australia. Much of the peninsula had been damaged by post war sand mining and creeping urban growth. We had recognised that there was a growing interest by local communities in conserving biodiversity (Fig 1), as Iluka had residential areas not far from a magnificent Nature Reserve (Iluka NR) and a National Park (Bundjalung NP). We conducted a community-based survey, sent to every household, which used a large, coloured map of the peninsula and a questionnaire asking respondents to mark the locations of the fauna they had seen. As a result of the survey, we concluded that vertebrate fauna does live on private land, that local knowledge is valuable, and that there is both community concern over declining fauna and support for planning, management and long-term fauna research.

Figure 2. Two junior volunteers learning radio-tracking to locate koalas, Iluka Peninsula. (Photo Dan Lunney 1992)

The rise of citizen science. We were not the first to use a community-based survey for wildlife in NSW. A team (Philip Reed and Dan Lunney) in 1986-87 greatly expanded on some skilled, but tentative, efforts to survey Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) in NSW by the small but effective Fauna Protection Panel. We produced a small questionnaire, which was distributed in 1986, and when we came to analysing the data in 1987, we joined up with CSIRO scientist Paul Walker who had a new tool, GIS, still in its infancy, but which showed great promise. By the time of the Iluka study, GIS was central to our methods.

Over the last 20 years there has been a revolution in the acquisition and application of community knowledge (Figs 2 and 3), a better appreciation of its extent, and limitations, and how to better integrate a greater diversity of disciplines for a more effective planning and management outcome. A Google Scholar search for ‘citizen science’ in July 2019 returned over 2 million results, establishing this phrase in the scientific literature to describe projects that enlist the community for collecting or analyzing scientific data. The rise and success of citizen science undoubtedly stems from the power of the internet and web-based tools that members of the public can use to record species’ locations, providing answers to such questions as: is a species increasing, decreasing or stable? – answers to which increase the capacity for managers and planners to be better targeted in their decisions. Such web-based technology also helps to overcome resource limitations where scale is an important factor. For example, for our 2006 state-wide koala and other wildlife survey we put a major effort into the distribution of the survey, a paper form with a large map. Now, the current 2019 survey is web-based, a procedure we explored in north-west NSW in 2014 where we selected the study area to be 200 by 300 km.

Figure 3. A skilled team climbing a tree to capture a koala for a health check and radio-tracking in a study of the koala population of the Iluka peninsula. (Photo Dan Lunney 1991.)

A further innovation comes from linking sociology to ecology and expanding the term from citizen science to ‘crowd-sourced information’. An example is a study in the four local government areas just north of Iluka, namely Lismore, Byron, Ballina and Tweed. The sociological side, led by Greg Brown, used the threatened koala as a case in point. The study demonstrated a novel, socio-ecological approach for identifying conservation opportunity that spatially connected landscapes with community preferences to prioritize koala recovery strategies at a regional scale. When multiple criteria (ecological, social, and economic) were included in the conservation assessment, we found the social acceptability criterion exerted the greatest influence on spatial conservation priorities. While this is a long way from our 1997 Iluka study, it is in the same lineage and represents two decades of development of what has become a widely accepted approach to regional planning.

Lessons learned and future directions. Looking back at the Iluka story, in one sense, it is a sorry one. When we first started our research on the Iluka peninsula in 1990, there was a visible population of koalas. It dwindled to extinction over the next decade so the locations of koalas in our EMR paper were of recent but fading memories. By defining our study area to a small location, it was possible to identify the cumulative impact of mining, housing, disease, roadkill, dog kill and fire. There have been reports of koalas being back on the peninsula as early as 2002 (Kay Jeffrey, local resident) and there have been subsequent sightings (John Turbill DPIE pers comm August 2019), we presume moving down from such locations as the northern part of Bundjalung National Park

Looking back on our EMR paper, we also see that the Emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae) was one of the most common species recorded by the community on the Iluka peninsula. It has now gone (John Turbill DPIE, pers. comm., August 2019). The coastal Emu population in northern New South Wales is now recognized as being under threat and a citizen science project called ‘Caring for our Coastal Emus’ has been established to collect recent emu sightings from the public using a web-based emu register to pin-point locations on a map. This register is administered by Clarence Valley Council and reflects the shift from the 1990s where the tools and expertise for collecting scientific data for management and planning were beyond the scope of local government. Today, local councils are considerably more engaged in conservation and community education projects.  Indeed, the Clarence Valley Council (2015) has prepared a Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management (CKPoM) for the lower Clarence, which includes Iluka, although it was not adopted beyond council level. The plan recognizes the importance of reducing further clearing and protecting and rehabilitating those areas that remain, and identifies that further studies and monitoring are required to establish the current status of the Iluka koala population.

In the early 1990s, we had prepared a possible plan of management for the koalas of Iluka peninsula but there was no legal incentive to adopt it. Thus, in late 1994, when one of us (DL) was asked by the then NSW Department of Planning and Urban Affairs to help write a SEPP (State Environmental Planning Policy) for koala habitat protection, the potential value of doing so was clear to us. SEPP 44 was written in three days, with a promise to revise it in 1995. SEPP 44 has proved to be valuable, although in recent years, the process of preparing and submitting CKoPMs from councils to the NSW state government seems to have stalled.

In conclusion, our EMR feature was written at the time of an upward inflection in the study of koalas, of fauna survey using crowd-sourced information.  We are now better equipped to use the new techniques from over three decades of what might be described as adaptive management of the ideas in our original EMR paper. We also press the point that research, exploring new ideas, incorporating new techniques and publishing our findings and thoughts make a crucial contribution to conserving not only koalas, but all our wildlife and natural areas, both in and out of reserves.  Such research is therefore vital to the survival of our wildlife.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies: In addition to the funding bodies in our EMR paper of 2000, support for the research supporting the above comments has been extensive, as reflected in the acknowledgements section of each report.

Contact. Daniel Lunney, Department of Planning, Industry and Environment NSW, (PO Box 1967, Hurstville NSW 2220 and the University of Sydney, NSW 2006. dan.lunney@environment.nsw.gov.au).