Category Archives: Landscape pattern & design

The spatial distribution and physical characteristics of Temperate Highland Peat Swamps on Sandstone (THPSS)

Key words: wetlands, upland swamp, geomorphology, mapping, Sydney Basin

Effective conservation and management of natural resources requires that we have an understanding of the spatial distribution and physical characteristics of the systems of concern. The results of the THPSS mapping project summarised here provide an essential physical (geomorphological) template atop which a range of other biophysical information on swamp structure, function and condition can be collated and interpreted.

Design. Using a 25 m Digital Elevation Modal (DEM) coupled with orthorectified aerial photography, the THPSS of the Sydney Basin were mapped in ArcGIS. Only valley-bottom swamps were mapped. Hanging swamps or hillslope drapes were excluded. In ArcGIS, the physical attributes of the swamps were attributed and measured. This included swamp area, elevation above sea level, swamp slope, catchment area, swamp and catchment elongation ratio, swamp length and distance to coast.

Figure 1: Regions in which THPSS occur in the Sydney Basin

Figure 1: Regions in which THPSS occur in the Sydney Basin

Results. Five regions of THPSS were mapped (Figure 1); Newnes (Figure 2), Blue Mountains (Figure 3), Budderoo (Figure 4), Woronora (Figure 5) and Gosford (Figure 6). Across these regions there is a total of 3208 individual THPSS. The combined area of these swamps is 101 km2 (10,100 ha) and the combined catchment areas that contain them cover 789 km2. They occur at a median distance of 57 km from the coast, but this is highly varied, ranging from 0.4 – 96 km.

The swamps occur in areas with an average annual rainfall of 1505 mm/year and average annual temperature is 15oC. They occur at a wide range of elevations. Those closer to the coast occur on elevations as low as 160 m ASL, and those further from the coast on plateau country can occur at elevations up to 1172 m ASL. The bulk of these systems occur at median elevations of 634 m ASL. The swamps are elongate in shape, having a median elongation ratio of 0.46. This makes the majority of these systems relatively long (median length is 216 m) and narrow. They occur in relatively elongate catchments with median elongation ratios of 0.61 and median catchment lengths of 488 m. Almost all these valleys terminate at their downstream ends at a valley constriction or bedrock step, making the valleys ‘funnel-shaped’.

Catchment areas draining into the swamps are, on average, 0.25 km2. This means these systems tend to occur in the very headwaters of most catchments in first or second order drainage lines. Each swamp is, on average, 31,537 m2 in area (3.1 ha). These swamps form on deceptively steep slopes. Median minimum swamp slope is 6.2%. The funnel-shaped valleys produce effective constrictions behind which alluvial materials and peat can accumulate, resulting in valley fills forming on relatively steep slopes.

 Stakeholders and Funding bodies. This research was funded through the Temperate Highland Peat Swamps on Sandstone Research Program (THPSS Research Program). This Program was funded through an enforceable undertaking as per section 486A of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 between the Minister for the Environment, Springvale Coal Pty Ltd and Centennial Angus Place Pty Ltd.  Further information on the enforceable undertaking and the terms of the THPSS Research Program can be found at www.environment.gov.au/news/2011/10/21/centennial-coal-fund-145-million-research-program. This project was also partly funded by an ARC Linkage Grant (LP130100120) awarded to A/Prof. Kirstie Fryirs and A/Prof. Grant Hose at Macquarie University. We thank Will Farebrother for working on this project. We thank the NSW Land and Property Information for the orthorectified aerial photographs that are used under a research-only license agreement.

Contact information. A/Prof. Kirstie Fryirs, Department of Environmental Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW 2109; +61298508367; kirstie.fryirs@mq.edu.au  A/Prof. Grant Hose, Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW 2109; +61298508367; grant.hose@mq.edu.au

Figure 2: THPSS of the Newnes region

Figure 2: THPSS of the Newnes region

Figure 3: THPSS of the Blue Mountains region

Figure 3: THPSS of the Blue Mountains region

Figure 4: THPSS of the Budderoo region

Figure 4: THPSS of the Budderoo region

Figure 5: THPSS of the Woronora region

Figure 5: THPSS of the Woronora region

Fig 6 - Gosford swamps map

Figure 6: THPSS of the Gosford region

Tasmanian Northern Midlands Restoration Project

Neil Davidson

Introduction. The Midlands Restoration Project is a long-term (multi decade) landscape-scale environmental restoration initiative designed to increase connectivity and biodiversity in the Northern Midlands, an area with a long history of agricultural production. It is intended to provide a demonstration of how strategic native vegetation restoration at an industrial scale can reconnect native animal habitat in a fragmented agricultural landscape.

Design of the project complies with the Conservation Action Plan for the biodiversity hotspot and ecological models that identified optimum pathways to reconnect existing vegetation remnants through ‘corridors’ and ‘stepping stones’, to improve habitat and facilitate the movement of native mammals and birds across the landscape from the Eastern Tiers to the Central Highlands and provide better resilience to predicted climate change impacts.

The landscape and its ecosystems. The Tasmanian Northern Midlands is recognised as being one of Australia’s 15 “Biodiversity Hotspots” – a place with exceptionally high numbers of native plant and animal species. Although over half of Tasmania’s land area is protected in national parks and reserves, the Northern Midlands biodiversity hotspot is mostly on private land, not formally protected, and its natural values are in a state of decline – with real risks of further species extinctions.

The low dry landscapes in the Midlands of Tasmania are predominantly privately owned and have been farmed for more than 200 years. The distinctive dry native vegetation communities are now present as small fragments in a sea of intense agricultural production. Most remnant patches are degraded through loss of understorey, tree decline and invasion by exotic weeds, and are at greater risk of further decline as a result of climate change. A consequence of this is that habitat values for native fauna are compromised, leading to fewer types and numbers of animals present.

Macquarie River near Ross: Part of the Ross wildlife corridor in the early stages of revegetationPhoto taken in June 2014

Fig 1. Macquarie River near Ross: Part of the Ross wildlife corridor in the early stages of revegetation. (Photo taken in June 2014.)

Aims and objectives. The aim of the project is to reverse the decline in species richness and habitat values in the Tasmanian Midlands biodiversity hotspot.  A primary objective is to re-establish functional connectivity for native mammals (quolls, bandicoots, bettongs, Tasmanian devils, bats) and woodland birds in the Northern Midlands, where less than 10% of native vegetation and less than 3% of native lowland grasslands remain.

Specifically the project aims to restore 6,000ha in two wildlife corridors across the Northern Midlands. We are doing this by strategic restoration using local native species to buffer and connect existing vegetation through the construction of two wildlife corridors, the Ross Link and Epping Forest Link (see Figs 1 and 2).

Map 1: Biodiversity Corridors in the Tasmanian Northern Midlands

Figure 2. Biodiversity Corridors in the Tasmanian Northern Midlands

Works to date. The first 1,000ha in Stage 1 is nearly complete, with 200,000 native plants planted in more than 600ha of grassy woodland and riverflats, and a further 400ha of existing native vegetation being secured for conservation purposes. We are currently planning Stage 2 of the project, to revegetate a further 5,000ha, including 1,000ha of riverine revegetation to complete the two corridors.

We are employing two revegetation approaches to best suit the open grassy woodland and river system landscapes:

  1. Woodland restoration: so far we have buffered and restored 410ha of native woodland remnants near Ross and Cressy. The wide-spaced plantings recreate an open grassy woodland suitable for more mobile animals and birds (Fig 3) .
  2. Riparian restoration: to date we have replanted 16km of the banks of the Macquarie River, Isis River and Tacky Creek (>200ha) with local native riparian plants. These are dense plantings (625 to 830 stems/ha) that provide habitat for less mobile and secretive animals and birds. Our Macquarie riparian restoration work is recognised as being currently the largest riverine revegetation project in Australia.
Grassy woodland restoration at ‘Connorville’. Caged trees & shrubs planted August 2014 – photo May 2015

Fig 3. Grassy woodland restoration at ‘Connorville’. Caged trees and shrubs planted August 2014 – photo May 2015

Fig 4.Tas Midlands

Fig. 4. Some of the important plant and animal species in the biodiversity hotspot.

Science. The project has strong scientific support from the University of Tasmania (UTAS), where Greening Australia is an industry partner for three Australian Research Council (ARC) supported research projects embedded in our revegetation and restoration activities:

  1. Professor Brad Potts is leading a large scale field experiment investigating whether it’s best to use local native provenance eucalyptus seed or seed collected from elsewhere for restoration plantings in an area already experiencing climate change;
  2. Associate Professor Menna Jones’s team is researching midlands native mammal and bird populations, how they move across fragmented agricultural landscapes and their habitat preferences; and,
  3. The new ARC Centre for Forest Value, where students are currently being selected and the projects are being determined.

Through these research projects we have more than 15 PhD candidates and post-doctorate staff assisting us to better design and undertake our on-ground restoration activities. In addition to the UTAS projects we have research trials underway to improve tree and shrub direct seeding and native grass seeding methodologies.

Cultural restoration. Whilst we place a high emphasis on ecological restoration in the midlands, we recognise that we must engage with the people in the landscape and their enterprises. In order to effectively communicate and engage with the local and Tasmanian communities and visitors we are working with artists, schools, businesses and Aboriginal people to better interpret the natural environment and involve them in our restoration activities.

We recognise the importance of supporting vibrant and profitable agricultural and rural businesses and complementing commercial enterprises in the midlands at the same time as improving the natural values and ecosystem wellbeing across the landscape.

Education. Greening Australia employs a teacher on an education project associated with the Midlands Restoration Program. The teacher works with the local Oatlands, Campbell Town and Cressy District schools and several urban schools to engage local and city children and communities in all aspects of the restoration project. The education program aligns with the Australian Curriculum across all subject areas and provides students with a great link between indoor and outdoor learning.

Landscape artworks. The University of Tasmanian College of the Arts is currently conducting a pilot landscape arts project to engage local schools and township communities in developing sculptural artworks to be placed in the landscape. The artworks will include functional features that are beneficial for native animals, which may include nesting hollows and/ or bird perches.

The project’s principle financial supporters in Stage 1 have been the Australian Government, the Ian Potter Foundation, John Roberts Charitable Trust, the ARC Linkage program, Pennicott Wilderness Journeys, Targa Australia, Stornoway, Dahl Trust, and the Foundation for Rural and Regional Renewal.

Future directions. In order to complete Stage 2 of the project (to restore a further 5,000ha in wildlife corridors across the midlands) we need to raise AUD$25m. Work is underway on landscape planning, community consultation, landholder engagement and the establishment of a fundraising campaign. We expect that the Tasmanian midlands will be transformed in the next five years, with two green bands of native vegetation connecting the Western Tiers to the Eastern Tiers and measurable improvements in native fauna habitats and populations.

Project partners. Greening Australia is working in partnership with many individuals and organisations to deliver the project and associated scientific research. Delivery partners include midland farmers, the Tasmanian Land Conservancy, Bush Heritage Australia, Australian Conservation Volunteers, Green Army program, Department Primary Industry Parks Water and Environment, UTAS, NRM North, CSIRO, Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association, Northern Midlands Council, Department of Education and Independent Schools.

Contact. Neil Davidson, Restoration Ecologist (Greening Australia) and Adjunct Senior Lecturer,  School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Sustainability Learning Centre, 50 Olinda Grove, Mt Nelson 7007,
GPO Box 1191, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia. Tel: +61 (0)3 6235 8000 Mobile; 0427 308 507 . Web:  www.greeningaustralia.org.au

Peniup Ecological Restoration Project

Justin Jonson

Key words: reconstruction, planning, direct seeding, monitoring, innovation

Introduction. The Peniup Restoration Project was initiated in 2007, when Greening Australia and Bush Heritage Australia jointly purchased a 2,406 hectare property as a contribution to the conservation and restoration objectives of Gondwana Link. The property has an average annual rainfall of approximately 450mm per year and had previously been farmed in a traditional broad acre sheep and cropping rotation system. The site is located within a highly diverse mosaic of varying soils and associated vegetation associations across Mallee, Mallee Shrubland, and Woodland type plant communities.

Planning and 2008 Operational Implementation. In 2008, Greening Australia’s Restoration Manager Justin Jonson developed a detailed ecological restoration plan for 950 hectares of cleared land on the northern section of the property. Information and procedures applied for that work are detailed in the EMR Journal article Ecological restoration of cleared agricultural land in Gondwana Link: lifting the bar at ‘Peniup’ (Jonson 2010). Further information is also available for the specific vegetation associations established via the Peniup Restoration Plan, with species lists according to height stratum, including seedlings planted by hand which were nitrogen fixing or from the Proteaceous genera. Funding for the initial 250 hectares of restoration were raised and the project implemented in 2008 (Fig.1).

Figure 1. Map showing the 2008 operational areas at Peniup with replanted communities replanted by direct seeding, and GPS locations of permanent monitoring plots (n=42), patches of hand planted seedlings (n=31) and seed (n=61), pre-planning soil sampling sites (n=115) and contour oriented tree belts to ensure establishment across the site (direct seeded understory consistently here).

Figure 1. The 2008 operational areas at Peniup showing communities replanted by direct seeding, and GPS locations of permanent monitoring plots (n=42), patches of hand planted seedlings (n=31) and seed (n=61), pre-planning soil sampling sites (n=115) and contour oriented tree belts to ensure establishment across the site.

Figure 2: Map showing GPS locations of permanent monitoring plots established at Peniup.

Figure 2. Location of 42 Permanent Monitoring Plots established in 2008 Peniup Ecological Restoration Project. Recruits from the direct seeding were measured 5 months after implementation, and then annually to assess persistence and long term development

Monitoring. A total of 42 monitoring plots were laid out across seven of the nine plant communities established (Fig.2). Details of the methodology, results and ongoing evaluation have been published (Jonson 2010; Hallet et al. 2014; Perring et al. 2015).

Results to date.  Monitoring indicates approximately 3.8 million plants were re-established by the direct seeding across the 250 hectare project area.  The numbers established in each plant community are shown in Fig.3 and represent the majority of plant species in each reference model. After 8 years it is clear that the project’s objectives are on track to being achieved, considering: a) absence of agricultural weeds; b) nutrient cycling through build up and decomposition of litter and other detritus;  seed-rain by short-lived nitrogen-fixing Acacia shrubs, c) diverse structural development of re-establishing species; and,  d) presence of many target animals using the site. Peniup’s progress in terms of recovery of the National Restoration Standards’s 6 ecosystem attributes is depicted and tablulated in Appendix 1.

Figure 3: Chart showing per hectare estimates of plant establishment counts by restoration plant community.

Figure 3. Per hectare estimates of Peniup plant establishment counts by restoration plant community.

Figure 4. Photo of riparian/drainage Tall Yate open woodland community with mid and understory shrubs and mid-story trees.

Figure 4. Riparian/drainage Tall Yate open woodland community at Peniup – with mid and understory shrubs and mid-story trees.

Innovation. As an adaptive management approach, small, discrete patches of seedlings of the proteaceous family were hand planted to make best use of small quantities of seed. Planting of these 5,800 seedlings in small patches, termed ‘Nodes’, provided further resource heterogeneity within relatively uniform seed mixes (by soil type). The impetus for this approach was to create concentrated food sources for nectarivorous fauna, while increasing pollination and long-term plant species viability (Jonson 2010).

Figure 5. Map showing distribution of Proteaceous Nodes.

Figure 5. Distribution of Proteaceous Nodes.

Lessons learned. Continuity of operational management is a critical component to achieving best practice ecological restoration. Project managers must be involved to some degree in all aspects of works, because flow on consequences of decisions can have high impact on outcomes. Detailed planning is also needed with large scale projects; otherwise the likelihood of capturing a large percent of site specific information is low. Finally, the use of GIS software for information management and site design is an absolute necessity.

Figure 6. Photo showing Banksia media and Hakea corymbosa plants with seed set.

Figure 6. Banksia media and Hakea corymbosa plants with seed set after 5 years.

Figure 7. hoto showing bird nest built within re-establishing Yate tree at Peniup within 5 years.

Figure 7. Bird nest within 5-year old Yate tree at Peniup.

Figure 8. Photo showing ecological processes in development including, a) absence of agricultural weeds, b) nutrient cycling and seed-rain deposition by short-lived nitrogen-fixing Acacia shrubs, c) diverse structural development of re-establishing species, and d) development of leaf litter and associated detritus for additional nutrient cycling.

Figure 8.  Five-year-old vegetation is contributing to a visible build up of organic matter and decomposition is indicating cycling of nutrients.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies. Funding for this Greening Australia restoration project was provided by The Nature Conservancy, a carbon offset investment by Mirrabella light bulb company, and other government and private contributions.

Contact information. Justin Jonson, Managing Director, Threshold Environmental, PO Box 1124, Albany WA 6330 Australia, Tel:  +61 427 190 465; jjonson@thresholdenvironmental.com.au

See also EMR summary Monjebup

See also EMR feature article Penium project

Watch video: Justin Jonson 2014 AABR presentation on Peniup

Appendix 1. Self-evaluation of recovery level at Peniup in 2016, using templates from the 5-star system (National Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia)

Fig 9. Peniup recovery wheel template

Evaluation table2

Piccaninnie Ponds Conservation Park, South Australia

Mark Bachmann

Key words: wetland restoration, Ramsar, rising springs, drainage, hydrology

Piccaninnie Ponds Conservation Park is situated 30 km south east of Mt Gambier in South Australia. For 15-20 years after the park was proclaimed in 1969, there was considerable local interest in trying to address previous changes that had been made to the hydrology of the wetland system.

Although it was protected, reserved and supporting a diverse suite of habitats and range of resident threatened species, Piccaninnnie Ponds was far from intact from a hydrological perspective. Prior to European settlement, water that discharged from the karst, rising-spring wetlands in the system flowed eastward across the State border into the Glenelg River Estuary, in far South West Victoria.

This is how the system remained until 1906, when the first of several attempts to drain the wetlands of Piccaninnie Ponds directly to the sea occurred. What ensued was a turbulent 9 year period during which the fishermen successfully lobbied to have the creek re-directed to the Glenelg River in 1915; a step which was ultimately unpopular with affected landholders and resulted in an alternative flow path again being cut to the sea two years later in 1917. Subsequent ad hoc drainage and development of portions of the wetland system continued and by the time the Piccaninnie Ponds Conservatioon Park was proclaimed in 1969, a new main artificial outlet drained the ponds directly to the sea.

The first attempts at advocacy to restore environmental flows to the Glenelg River in the 1970s and 80s to counter this long-term drying trend in the Park were unsuccessful, until the concept was revisited and a series of steps undertaken, starting in 2001, to achieve hydrological restoration. These steps culminated in the following actions.

 Fig. 1 – Stage 1 weir and fishway under construction in 2006.

Fig. 1,  Stage 1 weir and fishway under construction in 2006.

Actions taken to correct hydrology

  1. 2006 – Stage 1 weir and fishway constructed at Piccaninnie Ponds (Figure 1) regulated outflows on the artificial outlet. This had the effect of increasing inundation in a small area immediately upstream of the structure, under the direct influence of the weir pool created by the new structure, as shown in Fig 2.
  2. 2013 – The stage 2 weir and fishway upgrade (Fig 3) resulted in the structure height being lifted to increase future management flexibility, including providing the future ability to completely block outflows, should the option of re-instating the original flow path one day become a reality.

The stage 2 upgrade was completed at the same time as providing a new flow path to physically reconnect the isolated eastern and western basins at Piccaninnie Ponds. These wetlands had been separated for several decades by a combination of lower water levels, sand drift and the impact of the Piccaninnie Ponds Road. An aerial photographic view of the new flow path is shown in Fig 4.

These works within the original Conservation Park, have occurred in in a complementary way with those that have occurred in the neighbouring, newly reserved area at Pick Swamp, each contributing to the wider vision for restoration of this wetland complex.

Fig. 2. Drained condition of habitat in 2006

Fig. 2a. Drained condition of habitat upstream of the Stage 1 weir (prior to construction  in 2006).

Fig. 3. The upstream inundation and habitat change caused by the stage 1 weir, 2012.

Fig. 2b. The upstream inundation and habitat change caused by the stage 1 weir, 2012.

Results to date.

  • Increase in quality and area of available habitat for native freshwater fish, including the nationally threatened Dwarf Galaxias (Galaxiellla pusilla)
  • Protection of hydrological processes that support a wide range of other threatened species, from a number of taxonomic groups
  • A positive trajectory of change in the distribution of wetland habitats in the vicinity of the works (increased aquatic habitat and reversal of a drying trend that was causing terrestrialisation of vegetation communities)
  • Re-establishment of connectivity between the western and eastern wetlands in the Park for the first time in several decades
Figure 4 – The lifted and redesigned stage 2 weir and fishway on the main artificial outlet at Piccaninnie Ponds – upon completion in 2013.

Fig. 3. The lifted and redesigned stage 2 weir and fishway on the main artificial outlet at Piccaninnie Ponds – upon completion in 2013.

Fig 5a. Piccaninnie

Fig. 4a. Before works – in January 2003

Figure 5 – TOP – Before works image: January 2003. BOTTOM – Post-construction/restoration image: January 2014.

Fig, 4b. After construction/restoration – in January 2014.

Future directions. The works and outcomes described here were delivered by staff working for the South Australian Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR)

  • Ongoing management of the works and associated ecological monitoring in Piccaninnie Ponds Conservation Park is managed by DEWNR
  • Nature Glenelg Trust staff continue to provide specialist ecological advice and monitoring for the site when required by the site manager, DEWNR

Acknowledgements. The outcomes of the restoration project described can be attributed to a wide range of people who, in addition to the author (see current contact details below), worked at the South Australian Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources during the period described. DEWNR project ecologists overseeing the works described here include Ben Taylor (stage 1 weir) and Steve Clarke (stage 2 weir and associated works).

The project was generously funded and supported by a range of different grants and programs administered by the South Australian Government, Australian Government and the South East Natural Resources Management Board.

Contact. Mark Bachmann. Nature Glenelg Trust, PO Box 2177, Mt Gambier, SA 5290 Australia; Tel +61 (0)8 8797 8181; Mob+61 (0) 421 97 8181; Email: mark.bachmann@natureglenelg.org.au Web| www.natureglenelg.org.au

See also:

Bradys Swamp EMR short summary

Long Swamp EMR short summary

Brady Swamp wetland complex, Grampians National Park, Victoria

Mark Bachmann

Key words: wetland restoration, Wannon River, hydrology, drainage, Gooseneck Swamp

A series of wetlands associated with the floodplain of the Wannon River (Walker, Gooseneck, and Brady Swamps), situated approximately 12 km north east of Dunkeld in western Victoria, were partially drained from the 1950s onwards for grazing purposes (Fig 1). A portion of these wetlands was later acquired and incorporated into the Grampians National Park (and other peripheral reserves) in the mid-1980s, managed by Parks Victoria. However, the balance of the wider wetland and floodplain area remained under private ownership, creating a degree of uncertainty surrounding reinstatement of water regime – an issue that was left unresolved for over two decades.

Many years of planning work, including modelling studies and biological investigations by a range of organisations, never quite managed to adequately resolve the best way to design and progress wetland restoration work in this area. To address the impasse, at the request of the Glenelg Hopkins CMA in early 2013, Nature Glenelg Trust proposed a staged restoration trial process which was subsequently agreed to by landowners, neighbours, government agencies, and local community groups.

Figure 1. Image from the present day: showing artificial drains (red lines/arrows) constructed to drain Walker, Gooseneck and Brady Swamps, as it operated from the 1950s–2013.

Figure 1. Image from the present day: showing artificial drains (red lines/arrows) constructed to drain Walker, Gooseneck and Brady Swamps, as it operated from the 1950s–2013.

Trials and permanent works undertaken.

Initial trials. The restoration process began in August 2013 with the installation of the first trial sandbag weir structure to regulate the artificial drain at Gooseneck Swamp. Its immediate success in reinstating wetland levels led to similar trials being initiated at Brady Swamp and Walker Swamp (Fig. 2) in 2014.

Figure 2. The volunteer sandbagging crew at the artificial drainage outlet from Walker Swamp - August 2014.

Figure 2. The volunteer sandbagging crew at the artificial drainage outlet from Walker Swamp – August 2014.

Permanent works were ultimately undertaken to reinstate the breached natural earthen banks at Brady and Gooseneck Swamps (Figure 3), implemented by Nature Glenelg Trust in early 2015.

Figure 3a. Trial Structure on the Brady Swamp outlet drain in 2014

Figure 3b. The same view shown in Figure 3a, after the completion of permanent works in 2015

Results. The works have permanently reinstated the alternative, original watercourse and floodplain of the Wannon River, which now activates when the water levels in these wetlands reach their natural sill level. This is predicted to have a positive impact on a wide range of flora and fauna species.

Monitoring is in place to measure changes to vegetation and the distribution and status of key fauna species, such as waterbirds, fish and frogs. Due to drought conditions experienced in 2015, to is too early to describe the full ecological impact of the works at this time.

4. Gooseneck Swamp in Sept 2014: the second season of the restoration trial, just prior to the implementation of permanent restoration works

Figure 4. Gooseneck Swamp in Sept 2014: the second season of the restoration trial, just prior to the implementation of permanent restoration works

Lessons learned. The success of these trials has been based on their tangible ability to demonstrate, to all parties involved, the potential wetland restoration outcome for the sites; made possible by using simple, low-cost, impermanent methods. To ensure the integrity of the trial structures, the sandbags used for this purpose are made of geotextile fabric, with a minimum field service life of approximately 5 years.

The trials were critical for building community confidence and collecting real operational data for informing the development of longer-term measures to increase the depth and duration of inundation.

A vital aspect of the trials has been the level of community participation, not only at the sandbagging “events”, but also the subsequent commitment to ecological monitoring, for helping evaluate the biological impacts of hydrological reinstatement. For example, the Hamilton Field Naturalists Club has been undertaking monthly bird monitoring counts that are helping Nature Glenelg Trust to develop a picture of the ecological value of these wetlands and their role in the wider landscape, including the detection of international migratory species.

Acknowledgements. Project partners include Parks Victoria, Hamilton Field Naturalists Club, the Glenelg Hopkins CMA, Macquarie Forestry and other private landholders. Volunteers from several other groups have also assisted with the trials. Grant funding was generously provided by the Victorian Government.

Contact. Mark Bachmann, Nature Glenelg Trust, PO Box 2177, MT GAMBIER, SA 5290 Australia. Tel +61 8 8797 8181, Mob 0421 97 8181; Email mark.bachmann@natureglenelg.org.au. Web| www.natureglenelg.org.au

See also:

Long Swamp EMR short summary

Picanninnie Ponds EMR short summary

Victorian Northern Plains Grasslands Protected Area Network: formation and future management

Nathan Wong

Key words: ecosystem decline, conservation planning, grassland restoration, threatened species

Building the network. Since the early 1990s Trust for Nature (Victoria) (TfN) in partnership with State and Federal government agencies and local land owners have been working to protect, restore and improve the condition and extent of Grasslands in the Victorian Riverina. This critically endangered ecosystem has been degraded, fragmented, and cleared over the past 200 years by a range of impacts largely associated with the exploitation of these areas for agricultural production. This use has resulted in the loss of over 95% of the original grassland extent in Victoria and the degradation of all remaining remnants.

The first major achievement of this program occurred in June 1997 when Trust for Nature acquired the 1277 ha ‘Davies’ property following many years of negotiations. This land was transferred to the Crown in April 1999 to form the Grassland section of what is now Terrick Terrick National Park. Since this initial acquisition a significant number of purchases have been added to the public estate with the support of both State and Federal National Reserve Systems Programs. These additions have resulted in Terrick Terrick National Park now covering over 3334ha (Table 1) and the establishment of Bael Bael Grasslands NCR during 2010 and 2011 which now covers 3119ha.

Running concurrently with this increase in the public estate has been a program to build and secure private land under conservation covenant as well as Trust for Nature establishing a number of reserves to build its private reserve network in the Victorian Riverina. These efforts have resulted in the addition of 2804ha owned by Trust for Nature, including Glassons Grassland Reserve (2001), Kinypanial (1999), Korrak Korrak (2001), Wanderers Plain (2009-2010) and 1036ha of private land protected under conservation covenant.

As a result of these efforts the area of grasslands within the Protected Area Network in the Victorian Riverine Plains has grown from virtually nothing in the mid-1990s, to in excess of 10,000ha and continues to expand.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Fig 1. Very high quality Northern Plains Grasslands in Spring, note the inter-tussock spaces and diversity of flowering herbs (Photo: Nathan Wong).

Table 1. Acquisitions that have resulted in Terrick Terrick National Park, now covering over 3334ha.

Table 1

Current remnant condition. Whilst these grasslands are the best examples of the remaining ecosystem and protected under State and Federal government legislation, all of them have been degraded by past land-use. Therefore the need to not only protect but restore them is critical to the successful management of these systems in-perpetuity. Despite this past loss of a range of grazing-sensitive plant species many still persist in small isolated populations across the reserve network. Management of grazing, when it is applied, to ensure that continued losses do not occur whilst maintaining biodiversity values is one of the key aims of management. As a result of loss of quality, quantity and fragmentation of habitats, a range of important faunal species have also historically declined (Figs 2 & 3).

Need for management and restoration. There is great potential for management regimes to manipulate the composition of grasslands to enhance the likelihood of restoration success. Restoration of a range of grazing sensitive plant species which now either regionally extinct or remain in small isolated population will almost certainly require changes to grazing regimes, reintroduction of fire regimes and species reintroductions to ensure viable populations. Reintroducing faunal species will also require attention to connectivity and habitat availability issues in this context as many are dependent on the existence of large, interconnected territories e.g. Hooded Scaly-foot (Pygopus schraderi).

The Northern Plains Grasslands Protected Area Network: Strategic Operational Plan (SOP) is a landscape-scale strategic operational plan for the conservation management of the Northern Plains Grassland community within Victoria’s Protected Area Network, developed by the Northern Plains Technical Advisory Group in 2011. This Operational Plan now guides TfN and Parks Victoria in the implementation of an adaptive management plan for the landscape. This plan aims to establish and implement a restoration program across the public and private protected areas and is a marked shift from the previous management intent of maintenance of the system.

Fig 2. The area, particularly the Patho Plains and Lower Avoca, provide important habitat for the persistence of the Plains-wanderer (Photo David Baker-Gabb).

Fig 2. The northern plains grasslands, particularly the Patho Plains and Lower Avoca, provide important habitat for the persistence of the Plains-wanderer (Photo David Baker-Gabb).

Strategies for management and restoration. There are two main strategies that are being implemented. The first involves the extension of protected areas through a range of mechanisms; and the second involves active management to restore habitat quality and diversity to the extent possible.

Extent. Expansion of the current approach of reserve acquisition and covenanting that has been undertaken by the range of partners is likely to able to target and establish large areas (20,000+ ha) in the Lower Avoca and Patho Plains landscape. Both these areas are high priorities for Trust for Nature and form significant sections of the Trust for Nature’s Western Riverina Focal Landscape. The Patho Plains is significant as it is an Important Bird Area and a focus of Birdlife Australia to ensure the long term persistence of the Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus). The Lower Avoca also provides important habitat for the Plains-wanderer (Draft National Recovery Plan) and is one of the main population centres for Hooded Scaly-foot in Victoria.

Diversity. The increase of diversity and quality of these systems requires direct intervention in management as well as the introduction and establishment of the many rare and regionally extinct species from the system.

Plant species: Over the past decade, TfN and others have successfully trialled the reintroduction of a number of threatened and common plant species through hand sowing seed into grasslands. These species include: Hoary Sunray (Leucochrysum molle), Leafless Bluebush (Mairena aphylla), Rohlarch’s Bluebush (Maireana rohlarchii), Bladder Saltbush (Atriplex vesicaria), Plains Everlasting (Chrysocephalum sp. 1), Beauty Buttons (Leptorhynchos tetrachaetus), Small-flower Goodenia (Goodenia pusilliflora), Minnie Daisy (Minuria leptophylla) and a range of Wallaby species (Rytidosperma spp.) and Spear Grasses (Austrostipa spp.).

Animal species: Local habitat variability for a range of fauna has been achieved through the modification of grazing regimes and the introduction of burning regimes at a range of sites. This work aims to maximise niches and thus opportunities for a broad range of species.

Fig 3. Hooded Scaly-foot adult by Geoff BrownCOMP

Fig 3. Hooded Scaly-foot adult, a critically endangered legless lizard that occurs in the Northern Plains Grasslands, preferring habitat much like the Plains-wanderer. Photo: Geoff Brown.

Table 2.  Triggers required for various grazing and other management regimes to maintain appropriate intertussock spaces in Northern Plains Grasslands

Table2

Monitoring. The SOP includes a method for rapid assessment of habitat and functional composition of sites to support decision making and track habitat change over time. This is stratified by soil type as grazing and habitat values and floristic communities vary between soil types within the grassland mosaic. Triggers for action or management bounds have been set based on the structure of inter-tussock spaces on red soils. These have been established using the “Golf ball” method which calculates a golf ball score by randomly dropping 18 golf balls into a 1m x 1m quadrat and then establishing a count based on the visibility of the golf balls (>90% visible = 1, 90%-30% visible = 0.5, <30% visible = 0). For red soil grasslands the aim is to maintain the inter-tussock spacing within a golf ball range of 13-16 using the range of tools identified in Table 2. When a paddock reaches a golf ball score of 16 and it is being grazed, stock are to be removed. When the paddock reaches a score of 13 they are then to be reintroduced, within the bounds of the regime that is to be applied.

Additional to this there has also been collection of data in relation to the functional composition of sites with golf ball quadrats also assessed for the presence of a range of functional groups including Native C4 grasses, Native C3 Grasses, Exotic annual grasses, Exotic Perennial Grasses, Native forbs, Exotic Forbs, Native Shrubs, Moss cover, Other Crytptograms (i.e. Lichen, Algae, Liverworts), Bare Ground and Litter. At all these sites photos are also taken of each quadrat with and without golf balls and a landscape photo is also taken.

The capturing of these data and the region wide approach across both public and private areas will increase our knowledge of how to manage and restore these important sites as well as track progress of management actions and their effectiveness in providing protected areas for a range of threatened species.

Acknowledgements. A wide range of partners and individuals are involved in the protection of the Northern Plains Grassland and the development of the Northern Plains Strategic Operations Plan including Parks Victoria, Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning (DELWP), La Trobe University, Charles Sturt University, Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, North Central Catchment Management Authority, Northern Plains Conservation Management Network, Elanus Consulting and Blue Devil Consulting.

Contact: Nathan Wong, Conservation Planning Advisor, Trust for Nature (Level 5, 379 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia;Tel: +61 (0)3 8631 5888; Freecall: 1800 99 99 33; Mob 0458 965 329;Email: nathanw@tfn.org.au, www.trustfornature.org.au).

 

 

 

Defining reference communities for ecological restoration of Monjebup North Reserve in Gondwana Link

Justin Jonson

Key words: reconstruction; reference ecosystem; planning; ecosystem assemblage; monitoring

Introduction. Bush Heritage Australia’s (BHA) Monjebup North Reserve is a property that directly contributes to the conservation, restoration and connectivity objectives of Gondwana Link – one of Australia’s leading landscape scale restoration initiatives. Building on a solid history of revegetation projects implemented by collaborators from Greening Australia and individual practioners, the BHA management team initiated and funded a $40K Ecological Restoration Planning Project for 400 hectares of marginal farmland in need of restoration.

The specific aim of the Monjebup North Ecological Restoration Project was to 1) plan and 2) implement a ‘five star’ ecological restoration project as defined by the Gondwana Link Restoration Standards. Overarching goals included the re-establishment of vegetation assemblages consistent with the surrounding mosaic of plant communities, with a specific focus on local fauna and the restoration of habitat conditions to support their populations.

Figure 1: Map showing GPS locations of soil auger sampling locations.

Figure 1: Map showing GPS locations of soil auger sampling locations.

Planning and identification of reference communities for restoration of cleared land. The Monjebup North Ecological Restoration Project began with a third party consultancy contract to develop the Monjebup North Ecological Restoration Plan. This work began with the collection of detailed field data, including 120 soil survey pits collected to define the extent and boundaries between different soil-landform units occurring on the site (Fig.1). In the absence of previously defined and/or published information on local plant communities, an additional vegetation survey and report, The Vegetation of Monjebup North, was developed, which included 36 vegetation survey sites widely distributed across the surrounding vegetation (Fig.2). A total of 10 primary vegetation associations were defined within remnant vegetation on and around the site from this work (Fig.3). Additional soil survey pits were established within these defined plant communities to develop relationships between observed vegetation associations and soil-landform units. Cross referencing this information to the 400 hectare area of cleared land resulted in the delineation of seven core reference communities to guide the restoration project. These restoration communities ranged from Banksia media and Eucalyptus pluricaulis Mallee Scrub associations on spongelitic clay soils, to Eucalyptus occidentalis (Yate) Swamp Woodland associations located in low-lying areas where perched ephemeral swamps exist.

Figure 2: Map showing GPS locations of flora survey sampling sites.

Figure 2: Map showing GPS locations of flora survey sampling sites.

Figure 3: Output map of dominant vegetation associations at Monjebup North Reserve.

Figure 3: Output map of dominant vegetation associations at Monjebup North Reserve.

Figure 4: Mosaic of plant communities replanted at Monjebup North in 2012 using direct seeding and hand planted seedlings. A tractor fitted with GPS unit enables real time seeding passes, as shown on the map.

Figure 4: Mosaic of plant communities replanted at Monjebup North in 2012 using direct seeding and hand planted seedlings. A tractor fitted with GPS unit enables real time seeding passes, as shown on the map.

Figure 5: Mosaic of plant communities replanted at Monjebup North in 2013 using direct seeding and hand planted seedlings. A tractor fitted with GPS unit enables real time seeding passes, as shown on the map.

Figure 5: Mosaic of plant communities replanted at Monjebup North in 2013 using direct seeding and hand planted seedlings. A tractor fitted with GPS unit enables real time seeding passes, as shown on the map.

Seed sourcing. Seed from approximately 119 species were collected on and around the site for the restoration works. Seed collections for some species were collected from a number of geographically separate sub-populations, however these were never located further than 10 kilometers from site. Collections were made from at least 20 individuals for each species, and preference was made in collecting from populations which had 200+ individuals.

The primary on-ground works were initiated across four years from 2012 to 2015, starting with a 100 ha project area in 2012 (Fig.4), and a 140 ha area in the following year (Fig.5), both by Threshold Environmental Pty Ltd. A combination of direct seeding and hand planted seedlings treatments were employed, where seed mixes were developed to achieve the bulk of plant recruitment across each of the soil-land form units, and nursery grown seedlings were planted by hand for species found to be difficult to establish from direct seeding or for which stocking densities were to be more closely controlled. This work involved 13 communities and 148 species.

A number of innovative operational treatments were employed. These included grading 5 kilometers of contour banks and spreading chipped vegetation and seed pods, and 180 in situ burning patches where branch and seed material from fire-responsive serotinous species were piled and burned (Fig.6 before, Fig.7 after). Seedlings for rare, high nectar producing plant species were also planted in 203 discrete ‘node’ configurations. Habitat debris piles made of on-site stone and large branch materials were also constructed at 16 locations across the 2012 project areas.

Fig.6 In situ burning of serotinous branch and seed material

Figure 7: Photo of Dryandra nervosa juvenile plants establishing from one of the in situ burn pile locations. Other species used for this technique included Dryandra cirsioides, Dryandra drummondii, Hakea pandanicarpa, Isopogon buxifolius, and Hakea corymbosa.

Figure 7: Photo of Dryandra nervosa juvenile plants establishing from one of the in situ burn pile locations. Other species used for this technique included Dryandra cirsioides, Dryandra drummondii, Hakea pandanicarpa, Isopogon buxifolius, and Hakea corymbosa.

Monitoring. Monitoring plots were established to evaluate the direct seeded revegetation, as presented in the Project Planting and Monitoring Report 2012-2013. Fauna monitoring has also been undertaken by BHA using pit fall traps, LFA soil records, and bird minute surveys.

Results to date. Monitoring collected from post establishment plots in from the 2012 and 2013 areas (2 years after seeding) showed initial establishment of 2.4 million trees and shrubs from the direct seeding (Fig.8 and Fig.9). Results of faunal monitoring are yet to be reported, but monitoring at the site for vegetation and faunal is ongoing.

Figure 8: Graphic representation of monitoring results from 2012 and 2013 operational programs showing scaled up plant counts across the plant community systems targeted for reconstruction.

Figure 8: Graphic representation of monitoring results from 2012 and 2013 operational programs showing scaled up plant counts across the plant community systems targeted for reconstruction.

Figure 9: Photo showing 3 year old establishment and growth of a Banksia media/Eucalyptus falcata Mallee shrub plant community with granitic soil influence from the 2012 Monjebup North restoration project.

Figure 9: Photo showing 3 year old establishment and growth of a Banksia media/Eucalyptus falcata Mallee shrub plant community with granitic soil influence from the 2012 Monjebup North restoration project.

Lessons learned and future directions. The decision to develop a restoration plan in advance of undertaking any on-ground works was a key component contributing to the success of the project to date. Sufficient lead time for contracted restoration practioners to prepare (>12 months) was also a key contributor to the success of the delivery. Direct collaboration with seed collectors with extensive local knowledge also greatly benefited project inputs and outcomes.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies. Major funding for the project was provided by Southcoast Natural Resource Management Inc., via the Federal Government’s National Landcare Program and the Biodiversity Fund. Of note is also Bush Heritage Australia’s significant investment in the initial purchase of the property, without which the project would not have been possible.

Contact information. Justin Jonson, Managing Director, Threshold Environmental, PO BOX 1124, ALBANY WA 6330 +61 427 190 465; jjonson@thresholdenvironmental.com.au

See also EMR summary Peniup

 Watch video: Justin Jonson 2014 AABR presentation

Subtropical rainforest restoration at the Rous Water Rainforest Reserve, Rocky Creek Dam, 1983 – 2016

Key words: Lowland subtropical rainforest, ecosystem reconstruction, drinking water catchment, continual improvement process.

Introduction. Rous Water is actively engaged in ecosystem reconstruction within the drinking water catchment areas it manages on behalf of the community. The aim of these activities is to improve the functioning of essential natural processes that sustain water quality. The methodology used for rainforest restoration by Rous Water has evolved over time through an ‘adaptive management’ process at Rocky Creek Dam. This adaptive management approach has demonstrated that effective large scale sub-tropical regeneration at Rocky Creek Dam is achieved through complete removal of competing plants. The technique has become known as the Woodford Method and is now being applied at other Rous Water restoration sites.

The Rous Water Rainforest Reserve at Rocky Creek Dam is set in the northern headwaters of the Richmond River catchment, on the southern rim of the Tweed shield volcano. Basalt flows from the volcano have produced nutrient rich Red Ferrosol that supported diverse sub-tropical rainforest ecosystems across the region, until the rainforest was largely cleared for agriculture in the late 19th century. The Rocky Creek Dam site is adjacent to the Big Scrub Flora Reserve, the largest remaining remnant subtropical rainforest in the region. This reserve acts as a reference site for the restoration project (Fig 1).

Figure 1. Detail of the regeneration areas at Rocky Creek Dam, showing the areas treated and the year of the initial works

Figure 1. Detail of the regeneration areas at Rocky Creek Dam, showing the areas treated and the year of the initial works

Clearing of land in the vicinity of Rocky Creek Dam by early settlers commenced in the 1890s, with the cleared lands used for the establishment of dairy farms and a sawmill. In 1949, following acquisition of the site by Rous County Council (now Rous Water) for the construction of a water supply dam, this former farmland had reverted to weedy regrowth characterised by a mosaic of native/exotic grass, Lantana (Lantana camara) and Camphor Laurel (Cinnamomum camphora) which supressed any expansion or recovery of scattered rainforest remnants. Transformation of the site commenced in 1983 when Rous Water became actively engaged in ecosystem recovery by systematically removing weeds that suppressed rainforest regeneration, a practice that continues today.

Rainforest restoration methods. The practices and management tools used in rainforest restoration at the site have been previously described by Woodford (2000) and Sanger et al. (2008). The work method typically involves the systematic poisoning and slashing of weeds to promote recruitment of rainforest plants from the soil seed bank and then to facilitate the growth of suppressed rainforest plants, providing a structural framework for further seed dispersal by wind and, particularly, flying frugivores and thus further colonisation by later phase rainforest trees.

Since 1983, an area of approximately 70 ha has been progressively treated in 1-2 ha blocks using this methodology (refer Fig 1), with progressively diminishing amounts of follow-up treatment needing to be conducted in the treated areas over subsequent years to secure successional progression of the rainforest species.

Use of this method means that, due to recruitment from the seed bank and the use of stags (from dead camphor laurel) as perches for seed dispersing birds, very limited planting has been required on the site. This has preserved the genetic integrity of the Big Scrub in this location.

Results. A total of approximately 70 hectares of weed dominated regrowth has been treated at the Rous Water Rainforest Reserve since commencement in 1983 (Figure 1). This is approximately 35 ha since the report previously published in 2000 and represents approximately 30 % of the Rous Water property at Rocky Creek Dam.

This progressive treatment of compartments of weedy regrowth at Rocky Creek Dam has continued to lead to rapid canopy closure by shorter lived pioneer and early secondary tree species, with a gradual progression to higher proportions of later secondary and primary species with increasing time since treatment. All tree species that are listed as occurring in the reference site are not only now present in the restoration area, but informal observations suggest that most, if not all, are increasing in abundance over time (Figs 2-6)

Figure 2. Treated regrowth at the Rous Water Rainforest Reserve, Rocky Creek Dam After 1 year (foreground)

Figure 2. Typical regeneration of rainforest species 1 year after Lantana removal at the Rous Water Rainforest Reserve, Rocky Creek Dam (foreground).

Figure 3. Same photopoint after 6 years

Figure 3. Typical recovery after 6 years

Figure 4. Same photopoint after 12 years

Figure 4. Typical recovery after 12 years

Figure 5. Same scenario after 20 years

Figure 5. typical recovery after 20 years

Figure 6. After 30 years

Figure 6. Typical recovery after 30 years

The structure of the older treated regrowth areas sites appears to be converging on rainforest conditions, as noted by Kanowski & Catterall (2007). Thackway & Specht (2015) depict how 25 ha of systematically treated compartments that were covered almost entirely with lantana are progressing back towards the original Lowland Subtropical Rainforest’s composition, structure and ecological function (Fig 7). Overall the vegetation status in this area was assessed at between 85% and 90% of its pre-clearing status.

This process is, at its oldest 33 years old and in some locations much younger. So it is clear that the development of the subtropical vegetation still has many decades, possibly centuries, to go, before it approaches the composition, structural and habitat characteristics of a primary forest. Notwithstanding the large areas of natural regrowth that are yet to be worked, it is evident that a large proportion of the assisted regeneration areas progressively worked by Rous over the past 33 years now requires only a low level of ongoing maintenance. This shows that these sites are maturing over time and have largely reached a self-organising state, and in the fullness of time will achieve a high degree of similarity to the reference state.  (A recovery wheel for one subsite is shown in Fig 8)

Fig 7, Thackway fig rocky creek dam1

Figure 7. Assessment of change in indicators of vegetation condition in a 25 ha area. This depicts the degree of recoveery of Lowland Subtropical Rainforest found at Rocky Creek Dam, Big Scrub, NSW against a pre-clearing reference. (Graph reproduced with permission. The method used to generate the graph is described in Thackway, R. and Specht, A., (2015). Synthesising the effects of land use on natural and managed landscapes. Science of the Total Environment. 526:136–152 doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.070. ) Condition indices for transition Phase 4 were derived from prior reports including Sanger et al. 2008 and Woodford 2000. Metadata can be viewed at http://portal.tern.org.au/big-scrub-rocky-queensland-brisbane/16908 .

Lessons learned. Using this method of harnessing the natural resilience processes of the rainforest, we have been able to progress the recovery of an important water catchment area, restoring very high biodiversity conservation values in a landscape where rainforest was, and remains, in serious decline., The ability of the high resilience sites at Rocky Creek Dam to respond to the Woodford Method is clearly demonstrated, but there is ample evidence that application of this and similar resilience-based rainforest restoration methods can harnessed resilience at other sites in the Big Scrub that are at greater distances from remnants.

Figure 8. Distribution of management intensity classes across the Rous Water Rainforest Reserve at Rocky Creek Dam.

Figure 8. Distribution of management intensity classes across the Rous Water Rainforest Reserve at Rocky Creek Dam. (Legend for this map is in Appendix 1)

Current work and future directions. Work continues at the site and management is supportive of-site evaluation to assess the extent to which the treated areas are undergoing successional development using a range of available assessment tools.

To assist future planning, and in order to address the issue of how to best estimate and plan for restoration works and associated costs, Rous Water has adapted the methodology developed on the Tweed-Byron Bush Futures Project, where each restoration site/area was assigned a Management Intensity Class (MIC) based on a generalised assessment of site condition, weed composition and cover and other management requirements. (Fig 8) The MIC describes the frequency of restoration work required to restore the site to a minimal maintenance level and how many years this would take to achieve. The MIC aims to describe the extent of management intervention necessary to restore the site to a minimal maintenance level. For this analysis this equates to the establishment of a self sustaining sub-tropical rainforest buffer zone. Each management intensity class is associated with a particular restoration trajectory/cost per hectare, based on visitation frequency by a standard 3 person team and expressed in terms of number of visits required to control / manage weeds. Appendix 1 below shows details of the MIC classification, showing for each class, relevant site criteria, and the estimated level of bush regeneration resources required to bring each class to a low maintenance level.

Contact: Anthony Acret, Catchment Assets Manager,  Rous Water. Tel: +61 (0) 2 6623 3800, Email: anthony.acret@rouswater.nsw.gov.au

Rocky Creek Dam recovery wheel adjacent to Forest Edge

Appendix 1. Legend for Management intensity classes used in Fig 8. (From Tweed-Byron Bush Futures)

Appendix 1. Legend for Management intensity classes used in Fig 8.

Learning from the Coreen TSRS – and scaling up biodiversity recovery works at hundreds of sites in the Riverina, NSW.

Peter O’Shannassy and Ian Davidson

Key words: Travelling Stock Routes and reserves, grazing management, rehabilitation, direct seeding, Biodiversity Fund.

Introduction. The travelling Stock Routes and Reserves (TSRs) in NSW comprise a network of publically owned blocks and linear routes that were set aside between 100-150 years ago in New South Wales (NSW) to allow landholders to move their livestock from their grazing properties to markets. They occur in prime agricultural land and remain under management by the state of New South Wales’s system of Local Land Services organisations (LLSs).

Since trucking of cattle is now the norm, rather than droving, the use of TSRs has gradually changed to more occasional grazing. Considering the concurrent gradual decline in biodiversity of many private properties in the same period this means that the remnant grassy woodland patches and corridors represent the most important habitats in the Riverina region and contain dozens of Threatened species and five Endangered Ecological Communities variously listed under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act 1995) and the Commonwealth EPBC Act 1999. A general recognition of the high biodiversity value of the TSRs (and need to counter degradation on many of them) has resulted in a shift in local policy and practice towards improving the condition of biodiversity in the reserves.

Fig. 1

Fig. 1. Coreen Round Swamp TSR 2005.

Fig. 2

Fig. 2.  Coreen Round Swamp TSR at the same photopoint in 2015. (Note the increase in Bullloak recruitment from improved grazing management.

Works undertaken at Coreen Round Swamp and Oil Tree Reserve

Managed grazing has been applied to a number of Travelling Stock Reserves in the Riverina over a 10 year period – particularly two reserves: Coreen Round Swamp and Oil Tree reserve in the Coreen area. In 1998, condition of Coreen Round Swamp was ranked high conservation quality and Oil Tree TSR medium-high. In general, both TSRs contained tree species at woodland densities, but there was a low density of regenerating palatable trees (e.g. Bulloak and White Cypress Pine), with most species where present recorded as having sparse natural regeneration. The sites contained few regenerating shrubs (again rating sparse or absent) and exotic annual grasses were common in parts, with native grass swards patchy. Weed forbs were common

Restoration works commenced at Coreen Round Swamp and Oil Tree Reserve in 2004 and focused on:

  • Manipulating the timing of grazing with selected sets of livestock at specific times to disrupt the life cycle of, particularly, annual exotic grasses to reduce these undesirable species and to prepare the way for native perennial grasses.
  • Weed control – which involved multiple visits to the site throughout the year to control the various species as they emerged and prior to seed set. Spraying of herbaceous species with knockdown herbicide continued until the balance tipped and began to move towards a stronger native composition. Woody weeds such as Olive and Pepper trees were removed by hand cutting and painting with systemic herbicides.
  • Reduction of grazing impacts: Livestock were camped in the TSR’s holding yards rather than under the trees at night. This was carried out to reduce physical damage to shrubs, trees and the ground layer and reduce fertility inputs to the soils under the trees; fertility levels that are known to favour weed species invasion of such areas.

Results. Monitoring using standard proformas and photopoints showed dramatic changes in both reserves; with sites previously devoid of recruitment now developing a layer of tree and shrub saplings including Bulloak and White Cypress Pine. Where once 20-30% of the Coreen Round Swamp TSR was highly degraded, being dominated by herbaceous and grass weeds, this degradation class has now reduced to less than 10%; with the remaining 90% being of high quality. Similarly Oil Tree TSR had around 30-40% in a similarly degraded condition, which has now been reduced to 10-15% of the area; with 80% being in moderate-high condition and moving towards high as the shrub layer improves. (See Figures 1-5).

Fig 3.

Fig. 3. Oil Tree TSR in 2005 where a mix of native grass (spear grasses) and exotic annual grasses (Wild Oats, Bromus and Rye Grass) are visible.

Figure 4


Fig 4.  Same photopoint at Oil Tree TSR in 2015 showing a sward now dominated by native grass (spear grasses) and Curly Windmill Grass (Chloris truncata).

Coreen Recovery Wheel (a) prior to works and (b) after 10 years (Courtesy Ian Davidson.)

Expansion of the program to hundreds of TSRs in the Riverina

Building on the success of the work at the Coreen Reserves, a five year program is well underway, funded by the Australian Government’s Biodiversity Fund in 2012. In the first for four years, 251 sites have been assessed and interventions have taken place at 102 of these sites; with a further 18 sites to be worked during the remaining funded period.

Works to date include grazing management, weed and pest species management and 960 ha of direct seeding on 70 sites. The sites are being monitored using 250 permanent photopoints located to track key vegetation structural changes, as well some transect counts of regeneration and seedling success (recruitment). Approximately 108 assessments, using the original proformas plus plot counts, are being conducted on a subset of key sites including untreated sites. Initial results of the grazing management and direct seeding are encouraging. Very successful seedling germination has occurred in the direct seeded lines on most of the seeded sites (although germination on some of the drier Boree sites took longer). Some sites have had additional seeding done in subsequent years to provide a mix of age classes. The seedlings have now developed to a range of heights, with some older seedlings up to 2 m high, while some seed continues to germinate. Some of the more mature plants have seeded in the last 12 months and the expectation is that a soil seed bank will now be starting to form.

As aggressive exclusion of birds from woodland and forest habitat by abundant Noisy Miners is listed as a Key Threatening Process (KTP) in NSW and the Commonwealth – culling of Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala) is being undertaken to benefit woodland bird populations. This is being done at a scale not attempted before. Baseline bird surveys have been conducted on 80 sites established over 70 reserves including on sites with and without Noisy Minor culling; and sites with shrubs and without shrubs within a range of vegetation types. The seasonal benchmark surveys have been undertaken on 8 occasions but because only one post-culling survey (spring) has been undertaken to date, it is premature to identify whether changes in bird populations have occurred yet. The surveys will continue till Autumn 2017.

Lessons learned. The results of works at the Coreen reserves are clearly a direct response to the manipulation of the timing and intensity of grazing pressure to reduce weed and allow rest for recovering native species. Achieving the desired grazing management required a paradigm shift for managers and clients. The close management of grazing, direct seeding and burning also relies on a high level of understanding and commitment by the TSR manager.

Acknowledgements. We thank Rick Webster for his seminal rapid assessments of TSRs in the late 1990s throughout southern NSW. Norman Wettenhall a visionary philanthropist and a friend of TSRs funded much of the early assessment work. The more recent funding provided by the Australian Government’s Biodiversity Fund. A number of LLS staff / Biosecurity officers are involved in the works, including Peter O’Shannassy, Michael Mullins, Stuart Watson and Roger Harris. Ian Davidson, Regeneration Solutions P/L is undertaking the vegetation assessments, Chris Tzaros, Birds, Bush and Beyond, is undertaking the bird surveys and Phil Humphries provided the mapping

Contact: Peter O’Shannassy, Murray Local Land Services (74 Short St Corowa NSW 2646, 0427010891 peter.o’shannassy@lls.nsw.gov.au) and Ian Davidson Regeneration Solutions P/L (15 Weir Street Wangaratta, 0429 662 759, ian@regenerationsolutions.com.au).

Recovering biodiversity at Trust for Nature’s Neds Corner Station, Victoria

Doug Robinson, Deanna Marshall, Peter Barnes and Colleen Barnes

Key words. Private conservation area, natural regeneration, ecological restoration, rabbit control.

Introduction. Neds Corner Station is Victoria’s largest private conservation property. This 30,000 hectare ex-sheep and cattle station was purchased for nature conservation by Trust for Nature (Victoria) in 2002.

The property occupies the driest area of the state with an average annual rainfall of only 250 mm. As such, it has strong ecological links to the arid regions of Australia and Australia’s rangelands. Neds Corner sits strategically at the hub of an extensive network of public and private conservation lands bordering or close to the Murray River in Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia. The reserve is bordered on three sides by the Murray Sunset National Park and borders frontages along the Murray River and associated anabranches for more than thirty kilometres, where the River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) dominated riparian zone connects with Chenopod Shrublands, Semi-arid Chenopod Woodlands and Chenopod Mallee Woodlands. Trust for Nature’s restoration efforts are targeted at restoring woodland connectivity across the property to improve habitat extent and condition for woodland and mallee plants and animals, including the nationally threatened Regent Parrot (Polytelis anthopeplus). A biodiversity survey in 2011 found 884 native species at Neds Corner Station, including 6 threatened birds and animals, 77 threatened plants, and 21 species new to science. Trust for Nature continues to find new records for the property.

Fig 1 Neds 2003

Fig. 1. Highly degraded area (near watering points) in 2003 just after Trust purchased the property.

 

Fig 2 Neds 2011

Fig. 2. Same photopoint in 2014 showing extensive natural regeneration of Low Chenopod Shrubland after removal of livestock and extensive treatment of rabbits.

 

Planning for recovery. In 2002, when Trust for Nature first took on the property, the land was severely degraded from continuous over grazing by stock, rabbits and native herbivores; weed infestations; historic clearing of extensive areas of woodland for firewood and forage; and lack of flooding. Native vegetation was sparse over much of the property, soil erosion was extensive and the floodplain and semi-arid woodlands were all showing signs of extreme stress.

In the early years of ownership, management focussed on addressing the most obvious of these threats, with a focus on rabbit control and weed control. In 2010, with funding support from The Nature Conservancy, Trust for Nature prepared a Conservation Action Plan for the reserve, using the Open Standards for Conservation process, and a subsequent management plan. These planning documents identified the key biodiversity values on the reserve, the major threats to these values and the strategies to reduce threats and improve condition to achieve agreed ecological goals.Fig 6 Neds

Fig. 3. Dune Wattle (Acacia ligulata) natural regeneration after cropping was discontinued.

Fig 7 Neds

 Fig 4. Hop Bush (Dodonaea viscosa) natural regeneration after cropping ceased.

Works undertaken. Trust for Nature’s first action was to remove the livestock to allow the regeneration and growth of native vegetation. Stock fencing was decommissioned to enable free movement of native fauna, and new exclosure fencing to protect sites of cultural and ecological significance were also constructed. Major efforts were made to reduce rabbit numbers through the use of warren ripping, fumigation and 1080 baiting across the property. To date, over 20,000 warrens have been treated. Direct seeding and tubestock planting in the Semi-arid Woodland areas of the property have been continuous, with the cessation of a cropping licence, over 500 ha direct seeded in one year as part of an Australian Government funded project. In partnership with the Mallee Catchment Management Authority, environmental water allocations have been used to inundate areas of Neds Corner, providing a vital lifeline to many of the plants and animals that inhabit the riverine billabongs and floodplain forests. Artificial water points and superfluous tracks have been closed. Targeted fox and other feral animal programs are continuous.

Fig 3 Neds 2003

Fig 5. Highly degraded ‘Pine paddock’ in 2003 just after the Trust purchased the property.

Fig 4 Neds 2011

Fig 6. Pine paddock from same photopoint in n2014 after exclosure fencing, rabbit control and extensive direct seeding of trees and shrubs in 2007 (and again in 2010). The grasses all naturally regenerated.

Results. In the 14 years since domestic stock removal and the ongoing control of rabbits and weeds, there has been a dramatic increase in the cover of native vegetation, notably from natural regeneration (Figs 1-4) but also from extensive supplementary planting and direct seeding (Figs 5-8). In 2011, wide spread natural germination of Murray Pines occurred across the woodland sections of the property and Sandhill Wattle (Acacia ligulata) seedlings were observed on one rise where no parent plant was known to occur, indicating a viable seed bank may exist. The vulnerable Darling Lilies (Crinum flaccidum) continue to extend their range, given favourable weather conditions and the continuous control of herbaceous threats to the extent required to ensure adequate recruitment of these key flora species. Bird surveys undertaken for one of the targeted projects within Neds Corner over the past 10 years show an encouraging increase in reporting rates of Brown Treecreeper (Climacteris picumnus victoriae) (>x2 increase), Chestnut-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus ruficeps) (>x2% increase) and Red-capped Robin (Petroica goodenovii) (>x20 increase).

Fig 5 neds

Fig.7. Revegetation plantings in 2008

Fig 6 NEds 2014

Fig 8. Same revegetation planing line in 2013.

Current and future directions. Trust for Nature are due to revise their CAP and have identified the need to undertake recovery actions at a greater scale. They are currently investigating the feasibility of re-introducing some fauna species back into Neds Corner Station that haven’t been found in the region for decades, provided there is sufficient habitat to sustain them.

Acknowledgements. As a not-for-profit organisation, Trust for Nature (Victoria) relies on the generous support of many individuals, organisations and government entities. The main project partners to date include The Nature Conservancy, RE Ross Trust, Yulgilbar Foundation, Australian Government, Mallee Catchment Management Authority, Parks Victoria, Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning, Mildura Rural City Council, Northern Mallee Region Landcare, Traditional Owners and the thousands of hours volunteers contribute to Neds Corner Station.

Contact: Doug Robinson, Conservation Science Coordinator, Trust for Nature: (Tel: +61 1800 99 99 33.) Email: dougr@tfn.org.au; www.trustfornature.org.au

Photos: Trust for Nature