Category Archives: Restoration & management theory

Long-term restoration in the Box Gum Woodlands of south-eastern Australia – UPDATE of EMR feature

David Lindenmayer, Mason Crane, Daniel Florance, David Smith, and Clare Crane

Update to article published in EMR – Murray Catchment habitat restoration: Lessons from landscape level research and monitoring doi: 10.1111/emr.12051

Keywords: Revegetation, biodiversity recovery, monitoring, birds

Figure 1. Revegetated woodland near Wagga Wagga in the South West Slopes of New South Wales. (Photo courtesy of the Sustainable Farms project at The Australian National University. Australia).

Introduction

This project encompasses a major set of large-scale, long-term integrated studies quantifying the response of various groups of biota to replanted woodlands in the Box Gum Grassy Woodlands of south-eastern Australia. The work has been underway since 2002 and contrasts revegetated areas with regrowth woodlands and old growth woodlands on multiple farms nested within landscapes with varying amounts of native vegetation cover (Fig 1.). The responses of birds, arboreal marsupials, terrestrial mammal, reptiles, frogs and native plants to these different kinds of broad vegetation types (and within-site and landscape-level attributes) have been documented over the past 17 years.

Further works undertaken

Since the inception of the original project and associated monitoring, an array of additional studies have been completed (https://www.anu.edu.au/about/strategic-planning/sustainable-farms). These include investigations of the impacts on birds and reptiles of livestock grazing in plantings, the benefits for birds of understorey plantings within old growth woodlands, the impacts of a control program for the Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala) on other woodland bird species, and interaction effects between long-term climate, short-term weather and revegetation programs on birds (Figs 2 and 3). Further work aims to quantify the biodiversity and livestock production benefits of enhancing the ecological condition (and associated water quality) of farm dams.

Figure 2. Flame Robin and Rufous Whistler – two bird species of conservation concern that respond positively to revegetated woodland. (Photos by Robin Patrick Kavanagh.)Further results to date

Research and monitoring in the past six years have resulted in a number of key new insights of considerable importance for restoration programs. A small subset of these findings includes:

  • The conservation benefits of replanted areas for bird and reptile biodiversity are undermined by intensive livestock grazing in these revegetated areas.
  • The bird biodiversity values of old growth temperate woodlands can be enhanced by underplantings of shrubs and other non-overstorey plants, although it can take many years for such benefits to manifest. Importantly, the occurrence of hyper-aggressive species such as the Noisy Miner is diminished in woodlands where underplantings have been established.
  • Experimental efforts to reduce populations of the Noisy Miner were largely unsuccessful; sites where this species was culled twice were rapidly recolonized by the Noisy Miner.
  • Replanted woodlands provide critical refugia for woodland birds, especially during prolonged drought periods.

Collectively, these findings indicate that restored woodlands have important conservation values (especially for birds but also reptiles), with restoration being valuable to conduct not only in existing old growth woodland (through establishing underplantings) but also in previously cleared sites. The conservation value of woodlands can be particularly critical during climate extremes such as droughts. Efforts to control the Noisy Miner will likely be most effective through targeted revegetation efforts rather than direct culling of birds. Finally, there is a need to limit grazing pressure in revegetated woodlands and this can require the repair or replacement of fences around replantings, especially when such key infrastructure begins to deteriorate.

Figure 3. Noisy Miner – a reverse keystone species for which experimental culling programs have proven to be ineffective. (Photo by Pete Richman.)

Lessons learned and future directions

The ongoing work has clearly demonstrated the important new insights that are derived from long-term ecological research and monitoring. Indeed, long-term changes in patterns of occupancy of restored areas could not have been quantified without rigorous monitoring of a wide range of sites of different sizes, ages and other attributes. Key manager-researcher partnerships have been fundamental to the ongoing success of the array of projects in this restoration initiative. Indeed, some research and monitoring studies were prompted by  questions posed by natural resource managers (such as if there were vegetation cover thresholds for birds in temperate woodlands). Close working relationships with farmers have also been critical to the persistence of the various projects. Field staff in the project, who are based permanently in rural Australia, are key points of outreach and communication with farmers and other natural resource managers. Their presence has accelerated the rate of knowledge transfer and adoption of new practices (such as widening shelterbelts so that they have multiple production and conservation values).

Stakeholders and funding bodies

Ongoing work has been supported by many funding bodies and partners. These include the owners of more than 250 private properties (whom have allowed access to their land and undertaken major restoration works). Funding for the work has been provided by The National Environmental Science Program (Threatened Species Recovery Hub), the Australian Research Council, Murray Local Land Services, Riverina Local Land Services, Central Tablelands Local Land Services, the Ian Potter Foundation, the Vincent Fairfax Family Foundation, The Australian National University, and the Calvert-Jones Foundation.

Contact information

David Lindenmayer, Sustainable Farms Project, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, david.lindenmayer@anu.edu.au

Restoration and conservation in an iconic National Park – UPDATE of EMR feature

David Lindenmayer, Chris MacGregor, Natasha Robinson, Claire Foster, and Nick Dexter

Update to article published in EMR – Booderee National Park Management: Connecting science and management – doi: 10.1111/emr.12027

Keywords: Invasive animal and plant control, reintroduction, monitoring

Introduction

Booderee National Park is an iconic, species-rich, coastal reserve that supports a range of threatened and endangered native animals and plants. Several key management actions have been implemented to promote the conservation of biodiversity in Booderee National Park. These include the control of an exotic predator (the Red Fox Vulpes vulpes), the control of highly invasive Bitou Bush (Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata), the management of fire, and the reintroduction of previously extinct native mammals. A key part of work at Booderee National Park has been a long-term monitoring program that commenced in late 2002 and which has aimed to quantify the effectiveness of major management interventions, including the four listed above. The monitoring program has documented the long-term trajectories of populations of birds, arboreal marsupials, terrestrial mammals, reptiles, frogs and native plants in a range of major vegetation types (from heathland and sedgeland to woodland, forest and rainforest) and in response to fire, and weed and feral predator control. Importantly, the monitoring program has provided a foundational platform from which a suite of post-graduate studies and other research programs have been completed.

Further works undertaken

A key part of the researcher-manager partnership has been to analyse the long-term trajectories of populations of mammals, birds and reptiles in Booderee National Park. The monitoring data indicate that many species of mammals are declining, with some having become recently locally extinct (e.g. Greater Glider Petauroides volans) or close to extinction in the reserve (e.g. Common Ringtail Possum Pseudocheirus peregrinus) . This is despite populations of these species persisting in nearby reserves.  Robust interrogation of the multi-taxa monitoring data has been unable to identify reasons for these declines. Interestingly, the declines observed for mammals have not been observed to date in other vertebrate groups, including birds, reptiles and amphibians. An experimentally-based reintroduction program for the Greater Glider aims to not only re-establish populations of the species in Booderee National Park, but also to identify the reasons for the original decline. That program will be in addition to reintroduction programs already underway for other mammal species, the Long-nosed Potoroo (Potorous tridactylus), the Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) and Eastern Quoll (Dasyurus vivverinus) that used to inhabit Booderee National Park but which went extinct many decades earlier.

Additional research being undertaken in Booderee National Park has included: (1) studies of the effectiveness of control efforts for Bitou Bush and associated recovery of native vegetation and native fauna, (2) the interactive effects of fire and browsing on native plants and an array of animal groups, and (3) studies of leaf litter and other fuel dynamics in relation to previous fire history and macropod browsing.

Figure 1. Key area of Booderee National Park showing an area of coastal forest before and after Bitou Bush treatment.

Further results to date

Research and monitoring in the past six years have resulted in many new insights including some of considerable value for informing restoration programs. A small subset of these findings is outlined below.

  • Conventional approaches to the control of invasive Bitou Bush entail spraying ultra-low volume herbicide (Fig. 1), followed by burning of the “cured” dead material, and then respraying of the seedlings that germinate after fire. This spray-burn-spray protocol is both the most ecologically effective and the most cost-effective way of controlling Bitou Bush and, at the same time, facilitates the recovery of native vegetation. More recent analysis has revealed spray frequency as the most important determinant of long-term control. There are mixed effects of control methods on native species; plant species abundance was positively related to Bitou Bush control, while native bird abundance (except for Eastern Bristlebird Dasyornis brachypterus, Fig 2.) and mammal abundance were weakly negatively associated with Bitou control.
  • There can be strong interactions between the occurrence of fire and browsing by macropods on native plants as well as particular groups of animals such as spiders.
  • Reintroduction programs for the Southern Brown Bandicoot and Eastern Quoll have been relatively successful, although the latter species suffers high rates of mortality, particularly as a result of fox predation and collisions with motor vehicles. Nevertheless, populations of both species have survived over multiple years and reproduced successfully.

Figure 2. The Eastern Bristlebird, a species for which Booderee National Park is a stronghold. Notably, the species responds positively to management interventions to control Bitou Bush. (Photo Graeme Chapman)

Lessons learned and future directions

The work at Booderee National Park is a truly collaborative partnership between reserve managers, a university and the local Indigenous community.  A key part of the enduring, long-term success of the project has been that a full-time employee of The Australian National University has been stationed permanently in the Parks Australia office in the Jervis Bay Territory. That person (CM) works on an almost daily basis within Booderee National Park and this provides an ideal way to facilitate communication of new research and monitoring results to managers. It also enables emerging management concerns to be included as part of adaptive monitoring practices.

One of the key lessons learned from the long-term work has been the extent of ecological “surprises” – that is, highly unexpected results, including those which continue to remain unexplained. An example is the rapid loss of the Greater Glider and the major decline in populations of the Common Ringtail Possum. One of the clear benefits of this integrated monitoring-management team has been the rapid response to emerging threats. For example in response to high rates of mortality of reintroduced Eastern Quolls, control of the Red Fox was intensified within the park and greater cross-tenure control efforts with neighbouring private and public land managers have commenced. Regular evaluation of monitoring data and management actions has also enabled careful examination of the kinds of risks that can compromise reintroduction programs. These and other learnings will inform other, future reintroduction and translocation programs that are planned for Booderee National Park such as that for the Greater Glider.

Stakeholders and funding bodies

Ongoing work has been supported by many funding bodies and partners. These include the Wreck Bay Aboriginal Community who are the Traditional Owners of Booderee National Park as well as Parks Australia who co-manage the park with the Wreck Bay Aboriginal Community. Other key funders include the Department of Defence, the Thomas Foundation, The National Environmental Science Program (Threatened Species Recovery Hub), the Australian Research Council, the Margaret Middleton Foundation, and the Norman Wettenhall Foundation. Partnerships with Rewilding Australia, Taronga Conservation Society, WWF Australia, NSW Forestry Corporation and various wildlife sanctuaries have been instrumental to reintroduction programs.

Contact information

David Lindenmayer, Chris MacGregor, Natasha Robinson and Claire Foster are with the National Environmental Science Program (Threatened Species Recovery Hub), Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University (Canberra, ACT, 2601, david.lindenmayer@anu.edu.au). Nick Dexter is with Parks Australia, Jervis Bay Territory, Australia, 2540.

Re-establishing cryptogamic crust at The Waterways, Mordialloc

By Damien Cook

Photo 1.  Crytogamic crust consisting of mosses, lichens and liverworts in inter-tussock space in restored grassland at Waterways. These spaces provide recruitment opportunities for herbaceous species such as Wahlenbergia multicaulis and Brachyscome parvula

Introduction:  The Waterways is a unique urban development on the Mordialloc Creek, in Melbourne’s south eastern suburbs, which combines a housing estate with 48 hectares of restored habitat set aside for indigenous fauna and flora in open space, lakes and other wetlands. (See EMR Project summary ‘The Waterways‘.)

The revegetation of 4 hectares of native grassland and 7 hectares of swamp scrub provided the opportunity to trial the re-establishment of non-vascular plant species, as well as the higher plants which are normally the focus of restoration efforts.

Method. A diversity of cryptogams including Thuidiopsis furfurosa, Hypnum cuppressiforme, Triquetrella papillata and some Rosulabryum and lichen species were collected in the field from nearby remnants of native vegetation threatened with imminent destruction by freeway construction and new housing estates. These were placed in a blender and made into a 2 litre, thick slurry and the slurry was then diluted into a 20 litre a firefighting backpack. The diluted slurry was then applied to bare soils in the revegetated areas at the Waterways in August 2002; some areas were left untreated as a control.

Results. It was not until the wet winter of 2016 that it became apparent how successful this technique had been. There are now quite large areas with a good cover of cryptogams, particularly in the restored grassland and swamp scrub areas. There are some cryptogams in the untreated areas, but the species richness and cover are much lower. Cryptogamic crust cover appears to suppress weed germination, reducing the need for herbicide application, yet provides recruitment opportunities for native forbs (see Photos 1-3).

Acknowledgements. Thanks are due to the Haines family who were the developers of “The Waterways”, and in particular Stephen Haines, for involving us in the revegetation of the site and allowing us scope to trial different ecological restoration techniques. 

Contact: Damien Cook (rakali2@outlook.com.au)

Photo 2. Swamp Scrub at Waterways. Note the dense layer of mosses in the understory, particularly Thuidiopsis furfurosa

Photo 3. Fruiting capsules of a species of Bryum in restored native grassland at Waterways

A water point design to facilitate seed dispersal into revegetation or pasture sites

Amanda N. D. Freeman

Introduction. Although perches have been shown to enhance seed dispersal into revegetation sites, the efficacy of providing a water source to attract seed dispersers is largely untested.  In a Griffith University-led study aimed at “kick-starting” conversion of pasture to forest www.wettropics.gov.au/cfoc , bird-attracting structures that included a perch and water trough at the base were shown to enhance frugivore-assisted seed dispersal.  A complementary study in the same sites has identified the seeds of over 40 bird dispersed species deposited in the water troughs (Amanda Freeman; The School for Field Studies, Centre for Rainforest Studies (SFS-CRS) and Griffith University; 2012-2014, unpublished data).  Although the water troughs demonstrably attracted frugivorous birds, most notably Pied Currawongs (Strepera graculina ) using the water to regurgitate, any seeds regurgitated into troughs would be unavailable to germinate (Fig 1.).

Figure 1. A Pied Currawong at a water trough in a “Kickstart” pasture conversion plot. [See Elgar, A.T., Freebody, K., Pohlman, C.P., Shoo, L.P. & Catterall, C.P. (2014) Overcoming barriers to seedling regeneration during forest restoration on tropical pasture land and the potential value of woody weeds. Frontiers in Plant Science 5: 200. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00200]

Figure 1. A Pied Currawong at a water trough in a “Kickstart” pasture conversion plot. [See Elgar, A.T., Freebody, K., Pohlman, C.P., Shoo, L.P. & Catterall, C.P. (2014) Overcoming barriers to seedling regeneration during forest restoration on tropical pasture land and the potential value of woody weeds. Frontiers in Plant Science 5: 200. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00200%5D

Preliminary trial. Using a commercially available automatic waterer used for poultry, we designed a water point with a water dispenser that is too small for birds to regurgitate or defecate into, allowing expelled seed to fall to the ground.  The device is also simple and relatively cheap to build (<$100 Australian).  Once installed, the device requires little attention because the water remains cool and evaporation is minimal so the water may last several months without replenishing. The waterer, a plastic container which distributes water to a small dish by the action of a float, sits on a sturdy metal base 1.5m high.  The base has a perch allowing birds of different sizes to access the water from several angles and an attachment for a camera to enable bird visits to be monitored.  We envisage that the water point may facilitate seed dispersal by attracting frugivorous birds that will regurgitate and/or defecate at or near the water point.

We conducted an initial trial at a revegetation site at SFS-CRS in February 2016.  For this trial we baited the water point with Kiwi Fruit (Actinidia sp.) but this was soon consumed by insects. During the trial we recorded two species of fruit-dispersing bird, Pied Currawong and Lewin’s Honeyeater (Meliphaga lewinii) using our prototype water point within one month of its installation in (Fig 2.).

figure-2

Figure 2. A Pied Currawong drinking from a water point (kiwi fruit bait in foreground).

Design of second trial. In July 2016 we established a small trial at SFS-CRS to test the relative efficacy of perches alone versus perches coupled with our water point device in facilitating seed dispersal into cleared sites that lack remnant or planted trees.  We have nine fenced 3m2 plots in ungrazed former pasture, 15m from the edge of primary rainforest (Fig 3.).  Six plots have a perch, 3-4m high, cut to standard form from Sarsaparilla (Alphitonia petriei) trees.  Three of these plots also have a water point placed close to the base of the perch and a camera monitoring visits to the water.  Three plots have no structures.

Grass in all plots will be suppressed by herbicide spray (on an ‘as needed’ basis) and seedling recruitment in the plots will be monitored. In the first three months, no birds have been recorded using the water points in the trial plots.

Figure 3. Perch and water device trial plots, September 2016.

Figure 3. Perch and water device trial plots, September 2016.

Contact: Amanda Freeman, Centre Director, The School for Field Studies, Centre for Rainforest Studies, PO Box 141, Yungaburra, QLD 4884, Tel: +61 (7) 40953656; Email:  afreeman@fieldstudies.org

 

 

 

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.

Brush pack experiment in restoration: How small changes can avoid leakage of resources and underpin larger scale improvements for restoration and rehabilitation

David Tongway and John Ludwig

Key words: Landscape Function Analysis, biological foci, water harvesting, desertification, erosion

The following experiment illustrates how relatively small changes to redirect water flow can capture water and other biological resources at a restoration site. However the process occurs not only at the micro scale but cumulates to site and landscape scales, making it a primary underpinning principles of a method of site analysis, Landscape Function Analysis (LFA) that has been applied across Australia and other countries to assist land managers counter desertification by redesigning processes that regulate the flow of resources, minimise losses and foster cycling. See http://members.iinet.net.au/~lfa_procedures/

The LFA mindset and methodology involve a purposeful change of focus from listing the biota/ species present or absent at a site, to an examination of the degree to which biophysical processes deal with vital resources with respect to stresses arising from management and climatic events.

Fig 1 before

Fig. 1. Before: bare, crusted, low OC soil, erosion, and high water runoff mainitained by low but persistent, set-stock grazing by sheep and kangaroos.

Fig 2. after treatment

Fig. 2. The restoration treatment was simply to build brush-packs across the contour to trap water, soil and plant litter, slowing overland outflow. This also prevented the grazing down to ~1cm. Grass plants were able to maintain about 10cm of photosynthetic tissue.

Fig 4

Fig 3. After 7 years. Clearly the soil properties have improved the ‘habitat quality’ for the target vegetation.

Fig 5 14 years after

Figure 4. After 14 years, native vegetation re-established.

Fig 3. detail of bushpack after 3 years.

Fig 5. Detail of the brushpack after 3 years showing micro-structures capable of slowing water and accumulating resources.

1. tongway table

ANOTHER KEY OBSERVATION RELEVANT TO RESTORATION AND REHABILITATION

Where resources are not captured or leak out of a system, patchiness will become evident as resources self-organise around foci of accumulation – creating ‘patches’ where resources accumulate and ‘interpatches’ from which they ‘leak’.

The Golden Rule for rehabilitation is: “Restore/replace missing or ineffective processes in the landscape in order to improve the soil habitat quality for desired biota.”

Fig 6. Grassy sward healthy

Fig. 6. A grassy sward patch where the grass plants are close enough together that the water run-off is unable to generate enough energy to redistribute the grassy litter, which is evenly distributed. (The slope is from top to bottom in the image.)

There is also no evidence of sediment transport (not visible in this image). This is because of the tortuous path and short inter-grass distance. It would be possible to derive the critical grass plant spacing for “sward” function in any landscape, taking into account slope, aspect and soil texture.

Fig 7. Grassland in patch-interpatch mode, due to exceeding the critical runoff length for erosion initiation. (Slope is from top to bottom.)

Note that litter and sediment have both been washed off the inter-patch and have been arrested by a down-slope grass patch. Note the orientation of the grassy litter strands.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post-sand extraction restoration of Banksia woodlands, Swan Coastal Plain, Western Australia.

Deanna Rokich

Key words: research-practice partnership, adaptive management, smoke technology, cryptic soil impedance, topsoil handling.

Figure 1. Examples of undisturbed Banksia woodland reference sites.

Introduction. Banksia woodlands were once a common and widespread feature of the Swan Coastal Plain, Western Australia (Fig. 1); today less than 35% of the original Banksia woodlands remain in metropolitan Perth. When sand extraction activities were permitted over 25 years ago, Hanson Construction Materials opted to go well beyond the statutory minimum requirement of re-instating local native species. Instead, Hanson committed to meet the challenge to return post-sand extracted sites (Fig. 2) to an ecosystem closely resembling the pre-disturbance Banksia woodland. To achieve this high resemblance to the reference ecosystem, Hanson operations sought the assistance of the Science Directorate team within the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority in 1995. BGPA developed and implemented a research and adaptive management program with Hanson, resulting in a collaboration involving graduate and post-graduate student research programs into key facets of Banksia woodland ecosystem restoration, application of outcomes into restoration operations, and finally, restoration sites that are beginning to mimic reference sites (Fig.3).

Prior to the partnership, species richness and plant abundance, and thus restoration success, was limited in the rehabilitation. Research and adaptive management subsequently focused on improvements in soil reconstruction; topsoil management; seed germination enhancement (including smoke technology); seed broadcasting technology and whole-of-site weed management.

Monitoring. BGPA scientists have been undertaking annual plant monitoring of Banksia woodland restoration activities within reference and restoration sites for ca 15 years. This has resulted in data-sets on seedling emergence and plant survival within a range of sites, culminating in the development of annual performance criteria and ultimately, the ability to measure restoration performance in the short (e.g. from seedling emergence) and long-term (e.g. from plant survival).

Fig2d

Figure 2. The greatly reduced Banksia woodland sand profile following sand extraction, with topsoil being spread onto the pit floor.

Results. Consolidation of ca 15 years of data from >50 sites (encompassing a range of topsoil quality and climatic conditions) has revealed that stem density and species richness fall into three levels of restoration:

  • good restoration quality (high topsoil quality and favourable climatic conditions).
  • medium restoration quality (poor topsoil quality or unfavourable climatic conditions).
  • poor restoration quality (poor topsoil quality and unfavourable climatic conditions).

The integration of key research areas has resulted in:

  • Identification of first year species re-instatement being the blueprint for long-term species re-instatement.
  • Observation of cryptic soil impedance and extremely high plant loss in the standard ‘topsoil over overburden’ profile during the 2nd summer following restoration, but higher plant re-instatement and better ecosystem dynamics in the long term.
  • Improvement in seedling re-instatement, illustrated by perennial species return increasing from less than 10% to more than 70% (i.e. >100 perennial species), and stem density return of >140 perennial plants per 5m2 in Year 1, primarily due to improved topsoil handling methods – i.e. good quality, fresh and dry topsoil.
  • A ten-fold increase in the stem density of seedlings derived from direct-seeding due to innovative seed coating technology, delivery to site technology and sowing time optimisation.
  • Trebling of seedling recruitment success due to application of smoke technology.
  • Minimised weed invasion through the use of good quality and fresh topsoil, burial of the weed seedbank and prompt active weed management.
FIg3a

Figure 3. Restoration sites after 8 years, illustrating the return of the Banksia trees.

Implications for other sites. The post-sand extraction sites have provided important lessons and information about the management and restoration needs of Banksia woodlands – e.g. a high level of intervention is necessary, whilst cross-application of general restoration principles are not always possible for Banksia woodlands – useful for all those involved with managing and restoring Banksia woodland fragments within the broader Perth region.

Current and future directions. Hanson is committed to ongoing improvement through research – continually testing and employing new research techniques, programs and equipment that are recommended from BGPA research programs.

Post-sand extraction restoration practices now involve:

  • re-instating the soil profile in its natural order of topsoil over overburden, in spite of the cryptic soil impedance witnessed in the overburden in the 2nd summer following restoration;
  • striving for highest seedling establishment in the first year of restoration, prior to onset of soil impedance;
  • stripping and spreading only good quality (free of weeds), fresh and dry topsoil;
  • conserving topsoil by a strip:spread ratio of 1:2 (i.e. stripping over 1ha and spreading over 2ha);
  • burying direct-sown seeds given that seed displacement from wind and invertebrate activity is prolific during the typical seed sowing season; and
  • ceasing the common practices of mulching sites and tree-guarding plants as they provide negative or no benefits.

The partners are considering re-doing sites rehabilitated during 1991-1994, prior to research, in order to improve species diversity.

Acknowlegments: Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority and Hanson Construction Materials are the key parties in this project; involving many individual managers, researchers and students.

Contact: Deanna Rokich – Deanna.Rokich@bgpa.wa.gov.au

Fire as a tool in maintaining diversity and influencing vegetation structure – Grassy Groundcover Restoration Project

Paul Gibson-Roy

Greening Australia’s Grassy Groundcover Restoration Project commenced in 2004 to investigate the feasibility of restoration of grasslands and grassy woodlands (primarily by direct seeding) in the agricultural footprint of Australia. To date the project has achieved the reconstruction of grassy understories in grassland or grassy woodland on near to 100 sites in ex-agricultural land (predominantly across Victoria, but increasingly in southern to central New South Wales and mid-lands Tasmania). Post establishment we use fire in our sites to reduce biomass, particularly to inhibit grass growth which over time become the dominant life form, just like trees can in other communities. Opening the grass canopy allows for the small forbs and sub-dominant grasses to regenerate. Burning in particular can help create these canopy gaps and in a cost-effective way.

Fig 1. Snake Gully CFA burn at Chepstowe.

Fig 1. Snake Gully CFA burn at Chepstowe.

Fig 2. Restored herb-rich grassland on roadside near Wickliffe.

Fig 2. Restored herb-rich grassland on roadside near Wickliffe.

Fig 3. Differential management of Kangaroo Grass at Rokewood Cemetery.

Fig 3. Differential management of Kangaroo Grass at Rokewood Cemetery.

Operational challenges can and often do arise considering sites are located within urban or agricultural footprints where protection of life and property is paramount. This at times prompts us to consider alternative methods of biomass removal such as through grazing (sometimes used as a method for annual weed control) and mowing when burning is deemed inappropriate. These alternative or complimentary biomass reduction methods can also have additional benefits. For example, mowing and producing bales of cut straw, if cut in early spring or autumn, can be used for fodder. This is also the case with grazing. Alternatively, if sites are cut and baled in late spring or summer when grasses contain ripe seed, the hay can be moved and spread at other locations to create a grassland elsewhere.

While the project has carried out various combinations of these approaches at our restored grasslands in recent years, the following list includes a few examples of their use.

  1. Burning at Chepstowe (located to the west of Ballarat, Victoria) to reduce grass biomass and allow forbs to establish and persist. The burn is being conducted by Snake Gully CFA members (Figure 1).
  2. The nationally threatened species – Hoary Sunray (Leucochrysum albicans tricolor) and Button Wrinklewort (Rutidosis leptorrynchoides) were introduced by direct seeding along with many other ground layer species onto a roadside near Wickliffe, Victoria. Following establishment the grassland has been managed with fire by the Wickliffe CFA so that grasses do not dominate and the rare species can recruit and spread. (Figure 2.)
  3. Kangaroo Grass (Themeda triandra) growth has been the focus of differing management techniques within the Rokewood cemetery reserve Victoria (under the Cemetery Trusts grassland management plan). This remnant grassland contains the largest Victorian population of the nationally threatened Button Wrinklewort. To avoid the Kangaroo grass dominating the herb rich areas, it is maintained by fire, whereas in the approaches to the burial area it is kept mown low for function and protection of the memorial infrastructure. (Figure 3).
  4. Similar opening of a restored grassy canopy is achieved at Chatsworth in south western Victoria where a grassland currently dominated by Wallaby Grass (Rytidosperma setaceum) was mown and baled (Figures 4 and 5). This material was used to as fodder by the landholder.
  5. A late autumn burning of herb-rich restored grassland at Hamilton, Victoria, undertaken by the Buckley Swamp CFA (Figure 6).
  6. The aforementioned site at Hamilton taken in the following spring. It shows visitors touring the restoration where Common Everlasting (Chrysocephalum apiculatum) and many other sub-dominant forb species are in full bloom (Figure 7).
  7. Diverse restored grassland located adjacent to a wheat crop at Point Henry, near Geelong, Victoria. This site 16 ha site has been maintained over time by combinations of burning and cutting and baling (Figure 8).
Fig 4. Wallaby grass dominated grassland at Chatsworth pre-baling.

Fig 4. Wallaby grass dominated grassland at Chatsworth pre-baling.

Fig 5. Wallaby grass dominated grassland at Chatsworth post-baling.

Fig 5. Wallaby grass dominated grassland at Chatsworth post-baling.

Fig 6. Buckley Swamp CFA conducting a late autumn burn of restored herb-rich grassland near Hamilton.

Fig 6. Buckley Swamp CFA conducting a late autumn burn of restored herb-rich grassland near Hamilton.

Deciding which method or combination of biomass removal techniques to use, and at what time can be complex and there is no textbook. Good management is about constantly assessing the landscape and prevailing conditions to identify prompts for action. It is also about having the right networks and technical capacity available when required. As a general rule we find that when a site has greater than 70% vegetation cover of the ground surface and dry material is being held above 150 mm, there is enough combustible material to carry a flame. This condition also indicates that that the gaps in the vegetation are starting to close up.

Contact: (Dr) Paul Gibson-Roy. Lead Scientist, Greening Australia.Tel: +61 437591097. Email: PGibson-Roy@greeningaustralia.org.au

[This project summary is a precis of a talk presented to the Nature Conservation Council of NSW’s 10th Biennial Bushfire Conference, ‘Fire and Restoration: Working with Fire for Healthy Lands’ 26-27 May 2015. For full paper see: http://www.nature.org.au/healthy-ecosystems/bushfire-program/conferences/%5D

 Fig 7. Spring and wild flowers are in bloom at Hamilton.


Fig 7. Spring and wild flowers are in bloom at Hamilton.

Fig 8. Species and functionally diverse restored grassland adjoining a wheat crop near Geelong.

Fig 8. Species and functionally diverse restored grassland adjoining a wheat crop near Geelong.

Managing fire for nature conservation in subtropical woodlands

Emma Burgess, Murray Haseler and Martine Maron

Introduction. A study investigating the response of bird assemblages to mosaic burning is being conducted on 60,000 hectares private nature reserve in the Brigalow Belt bioregion of Queensland (Fig 1). The Brigalow Belt has recently experienced high rates of native vegetation clearing, motivating Bush Heritage Australia (BHA) to purchase and protect the property in 2001. The subsequent removal of cattle and horses from Carnarvon Station Reserve has increased grass and herb biomass. The seasonal surge in productivity the property now experiences however, increases the potential for more intense, frequent and extensive fires in hot, dry conditions. The risk of such wildfires needs to be managed, and a common approach to such management is prescribed burning. But how to ensure nature conservation objectives are still met?

Fig 1. Locality map of Carnarvon Station Reserve

Fig 1. Locality map of Carnarvon Station Reserve

In fire ecology, there is a common assumption that if we introduce a range of burn conditions to produce a mosaic of patches with different fire histories (pyrodiversity) – then the resulting diversity in fire histories and the greater representation of successional stages of vegetation is expected to accommodate more species in a given area (Fig. 2). Reducing the spatial scale at which fire history turns over- the “breaking up” of country- is also known as the patch mosaic burning approach.

Fig 2. Diagram of mosaic burning approach

Fig 2. Diagram of mosaic burning approach

Whilst we assume that pyrodiversity will give us increased habitat diversity, and therefore greater animal diversity, there is uncertainty as to the scale (alpha, beta or gamma diversity) at which pyrodiversity might influence biodiversity (Fig. 3). Alpha diversity is the total number of different species within a site or habitat; beta diversity is the difference in species composition between sites or habitats; and gamma diversity is the number of different species across all sites or habitats in the area of interest. At what spatial scale do we see the benefit for birds of mosaic burning (Fig. 3)?

Fig 4. Fire-sensitive semi-evergreen vine-thicket extending into Mountain Coolibah (Eucalyptus orgadophila) woodland, Carnarvon Station Reserve

Fig 4. Fire-sensitive semi-evergreen vine-thicket extending into Mountain Coolibah (Eucalyptus orgadophila) woodland, Carnarvon Station Reserve

Methods: We examine the relative influence of the diversity of fire histories, spatial configuration of these fire histories, spatial extent of particular fire histories and other measures of environmental heterogeneity on:

  1. Aggregated measures of bird species richness at both the landscape- (100 ha) and local-scale (1 ha); and
  2. Response of different bird foraging guilds to mosaic burning, at both the landscape- and local-scale.

 So what did we find? The diversity of fire regimes in the 100-ha landscape did not correlate with average site (alpha) or landscape- (gamma) diversity of birds. Rather, the total area of longer-unburnt vegetation was important for increasing bird richness at the landscape-scale, and sites in longer-unburnt vegetation had more species.

Although areas burnt in prescribed burns supported lower bird diversity compared to long-unburnt areas, prescribed burns are still necessary to reduce the risk of extensive wildfire. Such burns should focus on breaking up areas of high fuel at the beginning of the dry season (Fig. 4). The extent of long-unburnt vegetation that can be maintained with careful fire management is yet to be determined, but its importance as bird habitat is clear.

Acknowledgements: This work could not have been completed without funding and logistical support provided by AndyInc Foundation, Bush Heritage Australia and UQRS. Thanks to Peta Mather and Donna Oliver who assisted with field work. This study was carried out with approval from the Animal Ethics Committee at the University of Queensland (approval no. SGPEM/325/11/UQ).

Fig 4. Fire-sensitive semi-evergreen vine-thicket extending into Mountain Coolibah (Eucalyptus orgadophila) woodland, Carnarvon Station Reserve

Fig 4. Fire-sensitive semi-evergreen vine-thicket extending into Mountain Coolibah (Eucalyptus orgadophila) woodland, Carnarvon Station Reserve

Contact: Dr Emma Burgess University of Queensland, Email: e.burgess4@uq.edu.au

[This project summary is a precis of a talk presented to the Nature Conservation Council of NSW’s 10th Biennial Bushfire Conference, ‘Fire and Restoration: Working with Fire for Healthy Lands’ 26-27 May 2015. For full paper see: http://www.nature.org.au/healthy-ecosystems/bushfire-program/conferences/%5D