Category Archives: Threatened species & communities

Biological and cultural restoration at McDonald’s Swamp in northern Victoria, Australia

Dixie Patten (Barapa Wemba Working for Country Committee) and Damien Cook (Wetland Revival Trust.

Introduction. McDonald’s Swamp is a 164-ha wetland of high ecological and cultural significance, and is one of the Mid Murray Wetlands in northern Victoria. The restoration this wetland is part of broader project, led by the Indigenous Barapa Wamba Water for Country Committee in collaboration with the Wetlands Revival Trust, to address the loss of thousands of wetland trees and associated understorey  plants that were killed by poor agricultural and water management that caused prolonged water logging and an elevated the saline water table.

Figure 1. Laura Kirby of the Barapa Wamba Water for Country restoration team beside plantings of two culturally important plants that are becoming well established; Common Nardoo (Marsilea drummondii) and Poong’ort (Carex tereticaulis). (Photo D. Cook.)

The project has a strong underpinning philosophy of reconciliation as it is a collaboration between the Wetland Revival Trust and Aboriginal Traditional Owners on Country – access to which was denied to our people for a long time, disallowing us to practice our own culture and have places to teach our younger generations.  One of the main aims of the project is  to employ Barapa and Wemba people on our own land (Fig 1), not only to restore the Country’s health but also to provide opportunities for a deeper healing for us people. Many of the species we are planting are significant cultural food plants or medicine plants. Indeed it’s actually about restoring people’s relationships with each other –Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians – and maintaining our connection to  Country.

Over recent years the hydrology of many wetlands in the Kerang region has been vastly improved by a combination of drought, permanently improved irrigation practices in the catchment and the delivery of environmental water.  This has restored a more natural wetting and drying cycle that will enable regeneration of some prior species, largely through colonisation from the wetland edges and through reintroduction by waterbirds.

However, supplementary planting is needed to accelerate the recovery of keystone species at all strata and the ~50 ha of the wetland that has been assessed as highly degraded with little potential f or in-situ recovery from soil-stored seedbanks.

Figure 2. Aquatic species planted at McDonald’s Swamp, including Robust Water-milfoil (Myriophyllum papillosum), Common Water Ribbons (Cycnogeton procerum) and the endangered Wavy Marshwort (Nymphoides crenata). (Photo D. Cook)

Works undertaken: To date the project has employed 32 Traditional Owners, planting out and guarding canopy trees to replace those that have died, undertaking weed control, and replanting wetland understorey vegetation.

Over a period of 5 years,, around 60% of the presumed pre-existing species, including all functional groups, have been reintroduced to the site, involving 7000 plants over 80 ha of wetland. This includes scattered plantings of the canopy species River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), Black Box (Eucalyptus largiflorens) and Eumong (Acacia stenophylla).  Dense nodes have also been planted of a wide diversity of herbaceous wetland species including water ribbons (Cycnogeton spp.), Nardoo (Marsilea drummondii) and Old Man Weed (Centipeda cunninghamii). These nodes have been protected from waterbird grazing by netting structures for 3-6 months, after which time they have reproduced and spread their seeds and begun recruiting throughout the broader wetland..

Some areas of the swamp are dominated by overabundant native reeds due extended inundation in the past.  Such reeds – including Cumbungi (Typha orientalis) and Common Reed (Phragmites australis) – will be future targets for burning or cutting followed by flooding by environmental watering to reduce their abundance prior to reintroduction and recolonization by other indigenous species.

Figure 3. Prolific regeneration of the nationally endangered Stiff Grounsel (Senecio behrianus). The species is presumed extinct in South Australia and New South Wales and is now only known only from 5 wild and 6 re-introduced populations in Victoria. (Photo G Little)

Outcomes to date: Very high establishment and growth rates have been attained for the canopy tree species, many individuals of which have flowered and set seed within the 6 years since project commencement.  All the planted understorey species are now recruiting very well – particularly the Water Ribbons (Cycnogeton procerum and C. multifructum), Floating Pondweed (Potamogeton  cheesmannii), Common Nardoo (Marselia drummondii), Wavy Marshwort (Nymphoides crenata), Water Milfoils (Myriophyllum papillosum  and M. crispatum), Forde Poa (Poa fordeana), Swamp Wallaby-grass  (Amphibromus nervosus), River Swamp Wallaby-grass (Amphibromus fluitans) and the nationally endangered Stiff Groundsel (Senecio behrianus) (Fig.  3.).  The important Brolga (Antigone rubicunda) nesting plant Cane Grass (Eragrostis infecunda) has also spread vegetatively.  Where hundreds of individuals were planted, there are now many thousands recruiting from seed, building more and more potential to recruit and spread within the wetland.

After 7 years of a more natural wetting and drying regime, natural regeneration has also occurred of a range of native understorey species including populations of the important habitat plant Tangled Lignum (Duma florulenta), Lagoon Saltbush (Atriplex suberecta) and Common Spike-rush (Elaeocharis acuta) (Fig 4.).

Figure 4. Planted River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and naturally regenerating Tangled Lignum (Duma florulenta) and a range of other native colonisers and some herbaceous weed at McDonald’s Swamp some6 years after hydrological amendment and supplementary planting. (Photo T McDonald)

Stakeholders:  Barapa Land and Water, Barapa Wamba Water for Country Committee, Parks Victoria, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning and the North Central Catchment Management Authority.

Contact: Damien Cook, Wetland Revival Trust, Email: damien@wetlandrevivaltrust.org

Post-fire assisted regeneration at Rutidosis Ridge, Scottsdale Reserve, Bredbo NSW

 

Figure 1. Undamaged grassy woodland reference site occurring at high elevation at Scottsdale (Photo: Brett Howland)

Introduction. Scottsdale Reserve is a 1,328-hectare private conservation reserve, near Bredbo NSW, owned and managed by Bush Heritage Australia. For over 100 years prior to purchase in 2006 the property was utilised for grazing and cropping. While most of the higher elevation areas of the property remained intact and offered the basis for improving landscape connectivity for wildlife, the agricultural land use had resulted in conversion of the flats and lower slopes of the property to largely exotic pasture species and accompanying weed.

This case study focuses on one approx 10 ha Apple Box (Eucalyptus bridgesiana) / Snow Gum, (Eucalyptus pauciflora) grassy woodland ridge within the property – named ‘Rutidosis Ridge’ because it is the location of a small population of the Endangered plant species Button Wrinklewort (Rutidosis leptorhynchoides). Set-grazing by sheep as well as some cropping had left the site nearly wholly dominated by the landscape-transforming exotic pasture grasses African Love Grass (Eragrostis curvula) and Serrated Tussock (Nasella tricotoma). Some scattered copses of eucalypts and some herbaceous natives remained, however, suggesting that the site might have some native regeneration potential, but the number and abundance of natives on the site appeared very low and the site was very dissimilar to a nearby healthy reference site (Fig. 1).

Works undertaken. Around a decade after land purchase and the discontinuation of grazing and cropping, Rutidosis Ridge was aerially sprayed during winter with flupropinate herbicide at a low dilution (1L / ha) known to be effective on some strains of African Love Grass and Serrated Tussock without killing native grasses and forbs. While the African Love Grass and Serrated Tussock had died by the following spring as a result of this soil-active herbicide, no substantial native regeneration was observed due to the persistence of the thick thatch of dead African Love Grass (Fig 2).

  • Figure 2.  Typical site showing sprayed African Love Grass thatch even many years after aerial spraying. (Photo T. McDonald )
  • Figure 3.  Intense wildfire that passed through Bredbo, NSW in early February. (Photo” New York Times)

An intense wildfire passed through the property on 2nd February 2020 (Fig. 3). This largely consumed the thatch, exposing stony topsoils and providing opportunities for regeneration of both natives and weeds that were stored in the soil seed bank.  Anticipating the need for post-fire spot-spray follow-up after the fire to avoid any native regeneration being overwhelmed by weed, Bush Heritage Australia (BHA) collaborated on a program of regular selective treatment of weed with the restoration organisation the Australian Association of Bush Regenerators (AABR). Personnel involved both contractors and volunteers skilled in recognising natives and weeds at seedling stage capable of spot-spraying with negligible off-target damage (Fig 4).  

Because the fire had removed African Love Grass thatch and cued germination of natives and weeds, the aim was to treat all weed prior to its seeding.  This allowed the managers to (a) take advantage of the fire’s flushing out the weed soil seed bank and avoid its further recharge and (b) retain maximum open spaces for further natives to emerge and colonise. 

During the year after the fire (March 2020-April 2021), the ~10ha site had been subjected to approx. 600 person hours of spot spraying, mainly undertaken by experienced bush regenerators. This commenced in March 2000 and continued at least fortnightly during the growing season.

Figure 4. Location of comprehensively spot-sprayed areas and target-weeded areas at Rutidosis Ridge. An opportunity exists to compare differences in richness and cover of natives and weed between the two treatments, ensuring comparisons are confined to within-comparable condition classes.

What we found by 1 year of treatments.  Post-fire observations in  March 2020 revealed Snow Gum resprouting from lignotubers and roots and Apple Box and Candlebark (Eucalyptus rubida) resprouting epicormically.  A wide suite of native grasses and forbs were starting to resprout or germinate alongside diverse herbaceous weeds. Within the first 12 months of regular spot-spraying, the cover and seed production of approx. 30 weed species was very substantially reduced.  Combined with fairly evenly distributed rainfall in the follow 12 months this reduction in weed allowed ongoing increases in native species cover and diversity per unit area, with seed production likely by most native species.  There was negligible off-target damage from the spray treatments. In December 2020 over 50 native herbaceous and sub-shrub species (including at least 11 Asteraceae, 9 Poaceae, 4 Fabaceae and 2 Liliaceae) were recorded within the work zones, with cover of natives very high in the higher condition zones, but plentiful bare ground remaining in the lower condition zones (Fig. 5).  

Figure 5.  Top:  Directly after wildfire showing black stubs of African Love Grass; Middle: Volunteers spot-spraying during the growing season, and Bottom: same site after 12 months but when native grasses were curing off after seeding. (Photos T. McDonald)

Predominant weed species included recovery African Love Grass, Viper’s Bugloss (Echium vulgare), St John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum), Yellow Catsear (Hypochoeris radicata), Common Plantain (Plantago major), a range of thistles and around 20 other weed species.

Predominant natives included speargrasses (Austrostipa spp.), Redleg Grass (Bothriochloa macrantha), Kangaroo Grass (Themeda triandra), Native Panic (Panicum effusum), Common Raspwort (Gonocarpus teucrioides), Bindweed (Convolvulus erubescens), bluebells (Wahlenbergia spp.), Common Everlasting (Chrysocephalum apiculatum), fuzzweeds (Vitadennia spp.), Bear’s Ear (Cymbonotus lawsonianus), Creamy Candles (Stackhousia monogyna), Yellow Pimelea (Pimelea curviflora subsp. fusiformis) and Native St John’s Wort (Hypericum gramineum).  Species of higher conservation interest that regenerated included Blue Devil (Eryngium ovinum) and Threatened species that regenerated included Silky Swainson’s Pea (Swainsona sericea) and Button Wrinklewort. (Some of these species are pictured in Fig. 6).

Figure 6. Some of the forbs that flowered on Rutidosis Ridge during the growing season – including the Endangered Button Wrinklework (centre) and Vulnerable Silky Swainson’s Pea.(bottom left). (Photos various.)

Gradient of condition improving over time. As expected, the sites showed a gradient of condition (Fig. 7), with highest natural regeneration capacity retained in the tree clusters and stony crest, perhaps due to these less likely to be less favoured by sheep. (The tree clusters appear not to have been used as sheep camps). By March 2020, 1 year after work commenced, all sites were on a trajectory to move to the next higher condition class, assuming successful Winter 2021 aerial spray re-treatment of African Love Grass.  (Note that, while the pre-fire flupropinate treatment would normally have a residual effect for a few years and thus preventing germnation of this species, massive germination did occur of African Love Grass in many areas, which we speculate was either due to suitable post-fire germination conditions being delayed by the presence of dead grass thatch or to a possible denaturing of the chemical by the fire.)  

Figure 7. Condition classes in the Rutidosis Zones A-E revealed during the first few months of treatment. By the end of the growing season and after regular follow up spot-spraying it was clear that all zones comprehensively treated were improving in their native: weed cover ratio except for an increasing cover of African Love Grass, the treatment of which was deferred until a second aerial spray scheduled for winter 2021. (Map: T. McDonald)

Acknowledgements: This project would not have been possible without the help of BHA and AABR volunteers.

Contact: Tein McDonald and Phil Palmer, Scottsdale Tel: +61 (0) 447 860 613; Email: <teinm@ozemail.com.au and phil.palmer@bushheritage.org.au

 

Regenerating and planting of rainforest buffers to protect homes and rainforest from future fires

Joanne Green, Rainer Hartlieb and Zia Flook

Introduction. The wildfires of November and December, 2019, burnt over 5,500 hectares of Nightcap National Park and the surrounding areas, including the rural communities of Huonbrook and Wanganui inland from Byron Bay in NSW, Australia. The fires occurred during a period of extreme fire risk after 2 years with below average rainfall. They mainly burnt the sclerophyll forest along the ridgetops, but the extreme conditions also saw fire burn the edge of the rainforest where it was eventually extinguished.

This summary reports on actions on one multiple occupancy property in Huonbrook, NSW after an ember attack from the Mt Nardi fire entered the property in the early hours of the 9th November 2019. During the fire, residents evacuated.  Their homes were saved but they returned to find that the fire burnt an area of eucalypts  – mainly Flooded Gum (Eucalyptus grandis) and several bamboo species that had been planted during the late 20th century to reforest an area where subtropical rainforest had been-long cleared for dairy farming. The plantings had also become infested with weed including Camphor Laurel (Cinnamomum camphora) and Lantana (Lantana camara), the latter increasing their combustibility under dry conditions. After the fires, the landholders sought solutions that could provide a more fire-resistant barrier to reduce potential fire threat to homes and the nearby remnant rainforest. As a result they opted to restore the buffer zone with the more fire-retardant subtropical rainforest that had been the original native vegetation of the area.

Figure 1. Multiple native and weed species germinated after fire. (Photo Rainforest 4)

Figure 2. Prolific germination of the wind-dispersed Red Cedar (Toona ciliaris), among many rainforest species germinating and resprouting on site. (Photo Joanne Green)

Works undertaken. Starting in March 2020, with support from Madhima Gulgan’s Indigenous bush regeneration team, Huonbrook residents and landowners commenced work on the site. The first task in any zone to be treated was to clear the debris sufficiently to allow access for weeding and planting. The second task was to identify any subtropical rainforest species (germinating after the fire) that were to be retained and to note areas that were bare and would be suited to plantings. (No planting was done where there was any natural regeneration.)  The third task was to remove prolific exotic weeds, while protecting the natives, with the final task involving planting, staking and tree guarding.

The main weed species on site were Lantana, Running Bamboo (Phyllostachys spp.), Kahill Ginger (Hedychium gardnerianum), Winter Senna (Senna x pendula), and Inkweed (Phytolacca octandra). A total of 12 rainforest tree species germinating included the secondary species Red Cedar (Toona ciliaris) and Celerywood (Polyscias elegana) and the pioneers Red Ash (Alphitonia excelsa), Macaranga (Maccaranga tanarius) and Bleeding Heart (Homolanthus populifolius). A total of seven native rainforest understorey species  resprouted including Dianella (Dianella caerulea), Native Ginger (Alpinia caerulea.) and Cordyline (Cordyline petiolaris).

Figure 3. Madhima Gulgan’s Indigenous bush regeneration team assisting  landholders with post-fire weeding.  This work revealed where understorey natives were regenerating and where gaps required planting. (Photo Rainforest 4)

Some  300 rainforest trees (around 30 species) and another 300 understorey plants have been planted at the site to date from May-Sept 2020, with a total of 3600 plants proposed to be planted on additional fire affected sites as part of this project. Locally occurring tree species planted to date include Lillipilly (Acmena smithii), Native Tamarind (Diploglottis australis), Firewheel Tree (Stenocarpus snuatus), and Long-leaved Tuckeroo (Cupaniopsis newmanii) Understorey species planted included Dianella, Lomandra, Native Ginger and Cordyline.  All required tree guards to protect them from browsing by the native Red-necked Pademelon (Thyogale thetis).

After the planting, more natural regeneration of weed and natives occurred, particularly of the ground ferns; Harsh Ground Fern (Hypolepis muelleri), Binung Fern (Christella dentata), and Soft Treefern (Cyathea cooperi). Since the rain in autumn 2020 and the above average rainfall year that has followed, the landholders are managing weed in the regeneration and plantings together and work is now extending into the unburnt buffer zone.

Figure 4. A total of 300 containerised plants were installed to reinstate lowland subtropical rainforest on the site and provide a less fire prone vegetation buffer to protect residential dwellings. (Photo Joanne Green)

Figure 5. Diagram of location of the buffer plantation in relation to dwellings. (Diagram. Joanne Green)

Results to date: Nearly 12 months after planting has seen a nearly 100% survival rate and many of the planted trees have grown to an average height 1-2m. The number of native rainforest species on site now is approximately 25 tree and 23 understorey species and vines.  Ferns cover 40% of the site. The difference between the number planted and the number on site (18 species) can be attributed to natural regeneration.

Further colonisation of rainforest species is expected over time. Whilst, in hindsight, we see that much of the site could have been captured by natives as a result of  weed management alone, the planting has added a broader diversity of species, and will accelerate the process of succession to a more mature rainforest stand.

Acknowledgements: The Madhima Gulgan Indigenous bush regeneration team was funded by the inGrained Foundation and the Rainforest 4 Foundation. See https://www.rainforest4.org/. Technical advice was provided by Joanne Green.

Contact: Rainer Hartlieb, Huonbrook landholder, rainerhart@aapt.net.au and Zia Flook, Rainforest 4 Foundation Conservation Program Manager, zia@rainforestrangers.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ecological restoration in urban environments in New Zealand – UPDATE of EMR feature

Bruce Clarkson, Catherine Kirby and Kiri Wallace

[Update of EMR feature  – Clarkson, B.D. & Kirby, C.L. (2016) Ecological restoration in urban environments in New Zealand. Ecological Management & Restoration, 17:3, 180-190.  https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/emr.12229]

Key words: urban ecology; restoration; indigenous biodiversity; New Zealand

Figure 1. Kauri dieback disease is affecting individual trees (left). [Photo Nick Waipara]

Introduction. Our 2016 EMR feature reviewed the state of research and practice of ecological restoration in urban environments in New Zealand. We concluded that urban restoration can influence and support regional and national biodiversity goals. We also observed that research effort was light, lacking interdisciplinary breadth and may not be sufficiently connected to restoration practice to ensure long-term success of many projects.

While it is only three years since that review was published, urban ecological restoration continues to grow and evolve, and the policy setting and political context have changed significantly. New threats and opportunities have emerged. The spread of a dieback disease and the more recent arrival of myrtle rust, rapid uptake of Predator Free 2050, emergence of the One Billion Trees programme, a surge in housing and subdivision development, and a potentially more supportive policy framework are all major factors.

Threats and opportunities. Kauri dieback disease is severely affecting urban kauri forests and individual Kauri (Agathis australis) trees in Auckland and other northern North Island urban centres (Fig. 1). Large forest areas adjoining Auckland, including most notably the Waitākere Range and large parts of the Hunua Range, are now closed to the public, preventing access to popular recreational areas. The dieback is caused by a fungus-like pathogen Phytophtora agathicida that is spread through soil movement. The disease may have arrived from overseas although this is uncertain. There is no known cure but research efforts are underway to find a large-scale treatment option.

Myrtle rust (Austropuccinia psidii) was first found on mainland New Zealand in May of 2017, probably arriving by wind from Australia. Myrtle rust threatens many iconic New Zealand plant species in the family Myrtaceae including Pōhutukawa (Metrosideros excelsa), Mānuka (Leptospermum scoparium), Rātā (Metrosideros robusta), Kānuka (Kunzea spp.), Waiwaka (Syzygium maire) or Swamp maire, and Ramarama (Lophomyrtus bullata). These species are all used to a greater or lesser extent in restoration planting or as specimen trees or shrubs in urban centres, depending on amenity or ecological context. Mānuka is widely used as a pioneer or nurse crop for native forest restoration and is critical to the economically important mānuka honey industry. Waiwaka is a feature of many swamp forest gully restoration projects in Hamilton and this would be a significant setback if they were badly affected. The impact of myrtle rust is still not clear but experience from Australia suggests it may take several years before it reaches population levels sufficient to cause significant damage.

Figure 2. With rapid housing developments in New Zealand, it is important that urban restoration projects are well-planned and efficiently carried out to provide residents with greenspaces to benefit their cultural, health and wellbeing practices. [Photo Catherine Kirby]

In response to a range of housing issues characterised by many as a New Zealand housing crisis, the previous and current government has embarked on several major initiatives to increase the housing stock. A $1B Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF) was established in October 2016 with provision for interest free loans to local government to enable opening up of new large areas of housing. Many urban centres including Auckland, Tauranga, Hamilton and Queenstown made early applications to the fund. Hamilton City Council was successful in obtaining $290.4 M support for a new greenfield subdivision in Peacocke on the southern edge of the city. This subdivision is intended to enable development of some 3700 houses over the next 10 years and 8100 in 30 years. Approximately 720 ha of peri-urban pastoral agricultural land would eventually be developed (See summary). Coupled with this, and already in progress, is the construction of the Southern Links state highway and local arterial road network. The first proposed subdivision Amberfield covers 105 ha and consent hearings are currently in progress. The environmental impacts of the proposal and how they might be mitigated are being contested. In brief, survival of a small population of the critically endangered Long-tailed Bat (Chalinolobos turberculatus) is the main environmental focus but other aspects including the extent of greenspace and ecological restoration required for ecological compensation are being considered (Figs. 2, 3). With strong political pressure to solve the housing crisis in Hamilton and in other urban centres, making adequate provision for greenspace, especially urban forest, and preventing environmental degradation and indigenous biodiversity decline will be a major challenge.

Figure 3. Aerial photo of Waiwhakareke Natural Heritage Park (65 ha), an award-winning and ongoing ecological restoration project situated on the edge of urban Hamilton. [Photo Dave Norris]

The Predator Free 2050 (PF2050) programme which gained government (National) approval in 2015, aims to eradicate Stoat (Mustela erminea), Ship Rat (Rattus rattus), Norway Rat (Rattus norvegicus) and Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) from the whole of New Zealand by 2050 (Department of Conservation 2018). PF2050 is now gaining significant traction in urban environments (Figs. 4, 5) with many urban centres having good numbers of community-led projects underway (See PFNZ National Trust map). Crofton Downs in Wellington was New Zealand’s first predator-free community project. Led by Kelvin Hastie this project has effectively reduced predator numbers to the point that some sensitive native birds e.g. Kākā (Nestor meridionalis), have begun to nest in this suburb after an absence of more than 100 years (See RNZ report). Also in Wellington, the Miramar Peninsula (Te Motu Kairangi) has become a focus, because of its advantageous geography, with a goal to make the area predator free by 2019. Possums had already been exterminated in 2006 (www.temotukairangi.co.nz).

Figure 4. John Innes (Wildlife Ecologist, Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research) demonstrating trapping success. Removing pest mammals reduces predation, and also frees up the habitat and resources for our native fauna and flora to flourish. [Photo Neil Fitzgerald]

The One Billion Trees (1BT) programme was initiated by the new coalition government (Labour, NZ First, Greens) in 2017 with $238M released in 2018 for planting of both exotic and native trees across mixed land use types. It is not clear yet whether urban forest projects have received funding support but the guidelines suggest there is no reason why restoration of native forest in urban settings would not be eligible. While the emphasis is on exotic tree plantations, native species and long-term forest protection are increasingly being considered as viable options by the newly established government forestry agency Te Uru Rākau.

The policy setting for ecological restoration in urban environments is potentially becoming more favourable with the draft National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB) currently in review and the New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy under revision (See terms of reference). The draft NPSIB emphasises restoration of indigenous habitat in biodiversity depleted environments. Specifically, Policy 19: Restoring indigenous biodiversity depleted environments, recommends a target for indigenous land cover, which in urban areas and peri-urban areas must be at least 10 per cent. The revision of the New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy seems likely to give more emphasis to landscape scale restoration including urban environments.

Figure 5. New Zealand native lizards are extremely vulnerable to mammalian predation (e.g. mice, hedgehogs, ferrets, cats) as well as habitat destruction (e.g. new urban developments). [Photo Tony Wills]

Research update. Using the same targeted Google Scholar search method as reported in the EMR feature we have found 18 new peer reviewed papers published between 2015 and July 2019 (see updated bibliography) that are strongly focused on restoration in New Zealand urban environments. The single paper noted for 2015 was missed in our previous search. Again, we have not included books, book chapters or grey literature. This compares very favourably with the total 27 papers listed in our 2016 review of which more than half dated from 2009. An increasing publication rate confirms increasing interest and research efforts in aspects of urban ecological restoration. While most of the publications remain in the ecological science realm there are now some informed by other disciplines including engineering, psychology, landscape architecture and health sciences.

Most notably since our 2016 review, a new government-funded (Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment) research programme, People, Cities and Nature, began in November of 2016. This four-year $823 k per annum research programme ends in October of 2020 unless a funding rebid to be submitted in March 2020 is successful. The programme undertakes multidisciplinary research in nine NZ cities via six inter-related projects: restoration plantings; urban lizards; mammalian predators; Māori restoration values; green-space benefits and cross-sector alliances. While the emphasis was on the ecological science of urban restoration at the outset, the programme has become increasingly involved in understanding the multiple benefits of urban ecological projects including social cohesion and health and recreation benefits. The need to connect restoration research and practice has been met by undertaking multi-agency and community workshops involving researchers and practitioners in five cities to date with a further four scheduled before the programme ends.

Acknowledgements. The People Cities and Nature research programme is funded by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment under grant number UOW1601.

Information. Bruce D. Clarkson, Environmental Research Institute, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand bruce.clarkson@waikato.ac.nz; Catherine L. Kirby, Environmental Research Institute, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand catherine.kirby@waikato.ac.nz; and Kiri J. Wallace, Environmental Research Institute, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand kiri.wallace@waikato.ac.nz.

Rehabilitation of former Snowy Scheme Sites in Kosciuszko National Park – UPDATE of EMR feature 2019.

Gabriel Wilks

Update of EMR feature – MacPhee, Elizabeth and Gabriel Wilks (2013) Rehabilitation of former Snowy Scheme Sites in Kosciuszko National Park.  Ecological Management & Restoration, 14:3, 159-171. Doi https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/emr.12067

Key words.  Habitat construction, steep slopes, rock spoil.

Figure 1. Shaped rock spoil ready for planting more than 50 years after being dumped.

Introduction. Our original EMR feature article described the origins of this large, long-term rehabilitation program and the challenges faced in the first 10 years. The program’s aim was to address a range of impacts upon montane and sub-alpine vegetation and river corridors in Kosciuszko National Park from the Snowy Hydro Scheme, constructed from 1949 to 1974. Impacts included dumping of large volumes of rock spoil, loss of topsoil and native vegetation, introduction and spread of weeds and asbestos fragments in the landscape.  The article outlined the development of methodologies for restoration, particularly planting trials on steep rock spoils, and how obstacles such as slope instability, plant material availability and lack of soil were being overcome. The process of program implementation was given, including environmental and cultural heritage assessments undertaken as part of site works.  In 2013 a number of positive outcomes were already evident at the 200 sites that had been subjected to at least some treatment, including 18 sites where major rehabilitation works were undertaken. Outcomes included reduction in waterway impacts and invasive weeds, expansion of the Kosciuszko fauna database, regional community benefits, and production of an Australian Alps Rehabilitation Field Guide.

Further work. The Former Snowy Scheme Rehabilitation Program continues to reduce the long term environmental and safety risks of old degraded construction sites to Kosciuszko National Park, as well as improve their visual and ecological function. Some sites treated by 2013 have blended in with the surrounding landscape and are difficult to identify. Many sites are continuing to improve in condition over time, with distinct vegetation layers, natural plant recruitment and evidence of native fauna habitat. Construction history, rock spoil and loss of soil and plant species remain evident at highly altered sites, despite a high standard of rehabilitation work.

An additional 12 Major rehabilitation works have been undertaken since 2013, with selected signature projects and rehabilitation techniques described below.  Note that the former Snowy Scheme rehabilitation program does not address the impact of current Snowy Hydro Limited or proposed infrastructure and support networks such as powerlines, easements, river regulation or roads.

1. Rehabilitation of the Tooma–Tumut Access Tunnel Adit Spoil Dump. This spoil dump (Fig. 1) is located on the highly incised upper reaches of the Tumut River.  The spoil originates from construction in 1958-1961 of the Eucumbene–Tumut Tunnel, which transfers the headwaters of the Tooma River to Tumut Pond. Following earthworks in 2017, the planting crew successfully planted, watered, fertilised and mulched approximately 12,000 plants on rock spoil, with monitoring being undertaken by Greening Australia Capital Region staff (Fig 2.)

Figure 2. Year 1 Revegetation monitoring at Tooma-Tumut SD by Greening Australia Capital Region staff, 2018

2. Construction of contained habitat for the Southern Corroboree Frog. A series of remote enclosures (Fig 3) have been constructed in both rehabilitation areas and former habitat locations to enable re-introduction of this Critically Endangered species (Fig 4), following the devastating impacts of chytrid disease. These enclosures are developing essential stepping stones for frogs from captive breeding programs to move back into the wild. Design of enclosures requires ensuring self-sustaining food and water, shallow ponds for breeding, ability for Threatened Species staff to monitor and control disease and exclusion of other frogs. These works have been done in partnership with NSW Threatened Species staff and zoo institutions.

Figure 3. Constructing Southern Corroboree Frog enclosures in remote locations

Figure 4. Southern Corroboree Frogs living successfully back in Kosciuszko

3. First live record of Smoky Mouse in Kosciuszko National Park. The Smoky Mouse (Pseudomys fumeus Fig. 5) was found alive and well for the first time in Kosciuszko National Park, at a Happy Jacks rehabilitation site. Up until the discovery, the only currently known population of the small, smoky grey coloured mouse still surviving in NSW was in the Nullica area, NSW South Coast.  Three individuals, 2 males and 1 female were a significant find for survival and database records of this Critically Endangered Species, and a technical short note was published in EMR in 2017 by fauna surveyor Martin Schulz who found the animals.

Figure 5. A Happy Jacks Smoky Mouse.

4. Making people and places safer with rehabilitation. Sites that housed construction depots and townships during Snowy scheme construction still contained fragments of asbestos which were rapidly degrading due to weather exposure. As total removal was not feasible, the rehabilitation team worked with asbestos experts to develop practical measures to reduce public safety risks. At the remote Junction Shaft Contractors Camp (at Happy Jacks, Figs 6 and 7) and a former township and current camping ground at Island Bend a range of techniques were developed, delineation of zones for suitable uses, creating natural vegetation buffers and capping with rock spoil and plants.

Figure 6. The Junction Shaft Camp in 1955.

Figure 7. The same site 62 years later (and one year after works) with a range of capping and planting zones, including a heli-pad, Mountain Pygmy Possum habitat, and new plantings to improve safety and environment.

5.  Applying techniques beyond Kosci. Project team members took some winter time out of Kosciuszko to ‘grow’ a protection zone for a known population of Endangered Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) and constructed a series of ponds for future breeding in an old sand quarry at Worrigee Nature Reserve, Nowra (Fig 8). Given former quarries are a feature of a large infrastructure project such as the Snowy Scheme, the team had the technical knowledge for how to restore ecological function despite a radical departure from usual flora and fauna species. A range of techniques including neighborhood consultation, barrier logs and blocks, berms and vegetation were used to reduce the impact of recreational and unauthorised motorbikes and rubbish dumping.

Figure 8. Creating Bell Frog habitat in degraded borrow pits.

6. Growing rehabilitation resources and protecting karst ecosystems. The use of treated waste at the Yarrangobilly Caves visitor precinct to grow snow grasses (Poa spp.) for use in rehabilitation projects across Kosciuszko and been continued and developed (Fig. 9). A renewed emphasis on site production has enabled Poa seed to be available for other projects within the Park. This provides an ecologically preferable option for soil stabilisation and ground cover establishment, reducing the risk of weed invasion and dependence on sterile rye corn as the only available option.

Figure 9. Inspecting plants for seed harvest, which yielded 52 kgs of Poa seed in 2017.

Lessons Learned. It is clear that this is a unique rehabilitation project due to the large number of sites, the natural and heritage values of Kosciuszko National Park and the longevity and continuity of the commitment (approx. 20 years).  Understandably, however, at this point in time challenges in rehabilitation remain. ‘Off the shelf’ rehabilitation products are limited due to remoteness of locations, plant species required, Park management policies and required hygiene protocols. It is important that additional threats are not accidentally introduced, such as foreign pathogens and flora and fauna. As much as possible, resources such as coarse woody debris, woodchip, plant material and compost are sourced from within the Park. A flexible and dynamic approach to the very definition of rehabilitation and techniques and materials is required.  Specific lessons include the following.

Adding organic material on degraded sites is always beneficial. Rehabilitation success has been most obvious where logs, litter, woodchip and straw have been added to the site, to provide mico-niche climate, habitat, and improve soil. While this may increase short term management requirements such as weed control, the commitment is worth it due to the improved results.

Creating compost from old sawmill sawdust has worked well for this rehabilitation project. The most recent development however is in the use of organics waste and treated effluent from visitation facilities as a compost, and there is opportunity for this on-Park recycling to develop.

Other resources such as rice straw have become limited during periods of sustained drought and less rice production. This will remain a challenge into the future. The value of minimising ground cover loss, retaining natural soil characteristics and organic matter in situ and ensuring rapid rehabilitation after disturbance in future developments will become increasingly important for rehabilitation success.

Be creative with team skills and capacity. Problems such asbestos contaminant presence must be addressed for safety, but doesn’t mean walking away from the challenge. A degraded site may be the perfect place to develop species targeted habitat.  Seek expertise advice and consider a range of current and new solutions.

ContactGabriel Wilks, Senior Project Officer, NPWS Southern Ranges Services. PO Box 472, Tumut NSW 2720.  Email: Gabriel.Wilks@environment.nsw.gov.au

Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub: is fire the key to restoration? – UPDATE to EMR FEATURE

Geoff Lambert, and Judy Lambert

[Update to EMR Feature – Geoff Lambert and Judy Lambert (2015) Progress with restoration and management of Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub on North Head, Sydney.  Ecological Management & Restoration, 16:2, 95-199. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/emr.12160]

Key Words. Banksia Scrub, North Head, Critically Endangered Ecological Community, Diversity.

Fig 1. Images of the same location over time, taken from “walk-through” photographic surveys (top to bottom) pre-fire, immediate post-fire and 5-years post-fire. (Photos Geoff Lambert)

Introduction. In the original feature, we reported on a number of projects related to the fire ecology of Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub (ESBS), also known as Coastal Sand Mantle Heath (S_HL03), located in conserved areas on North Head, Sydney Australia. Following a Hazard Reduction burn in September 2012, we examined changes in species numbers and diversity and compared these measures with control areas which had been thinned. We fenced one-third of the survey quadrats to test the effects of rabbit herbivory. There had been no fire in this area since 1951.

Twelve months after treatment, burned ESBS had more native plants, greater plant cover, more native species, greater species diversity and fewer weeds than did thinned ESBS (Fig 1). Areas that had been fenced after fire had “superior” attributes to unfenced areas. The results suggested that fire could be used to rejuvenate this heath and that this method produced superior results to thinning, but with a different species mix. Results of either method would be inferior were attempts not made to control predation by rabbits (See 2015 report).

Further works undertaken. In 2015 and 2017 we repeated the surveys, including photographic surveys on the same quadrats. Further Hazard Reduction burns were conducted, which provided an opportunity to repeat the studies reported in the 2015 feature. The study design of the burns was broadly similar to the earlier study, but rabbits were excluded by fencing four large “exclosures” over half the burn site. The pre-fire botanical survey was carried out in 2014, with logistical difficulties delaying the burn until late May 2018. Drought and other factors saw a post-fire survey delayed until October 2019. Photographic surveys of the quadrats have been completed.

Seven cm-resolution, six-weekly, aerial photography of North Head is regularly flown by Nearmap© (Fig 2). We use this photography to monitor the whole of the headland and, in particular, the various burn areas. In order to extrapolate from our quadrat-based sampling (usually 1% of a burn area), the University of Sydney flew 5mm-resolution UAV-based surveys on our behalf, on one of the 2012 burn areas and on the 2018 burn area in November 2017 (Fig 3) .

Apart from the fire studies, the general program of vegetation propagation and management has been continued by the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust and the North Head Sanctuary Foundation. The Australian Wildlife Conservancy has also undertaken a “whole of headland”, quadrat-based vegetation survey as the first stage of its “Ecological Health” rolling program for its sites.

Fig 2. Nearmap© site images (top to bottom) pre-fire, immediate post-fire and 7-years post-fire. (Photos Nearmap)

Further results. The original results suggested that fire could be used advantageously to rejuvenate ESBS and produced superior results to thinning. While subsequent photographic monitoring shows distinct vegetation change (Figs 1 and 2), on-ground monitoring showed that by five years after the fire we could no longer say this with any optimism. In summary:

  • In the immediate fire aftermath, there was vigorous growth of many species
  • Over the ensuing 5 years, plants began to compete for space, with many dropping out
  • Species diversity was high following the fire but then dropped below pre-fire levels
  • Some plants (e.g. Lepidosperma and Persoonia spp.) came to dominate via vegetative spread
  • The reed, Chordifex dimorphus has almost disappeared
  • Tea-trees (Leptospermum spp.) are gradually making a comeback
  • Between 2015 and 2017, ESBS species numbers were outpaced by non-ESBS species, but held their own in terms of ground cover.

The total disappearance of Chordifex (formerly an abundant species on North Head and prominent in the landscape) from fully-burned quadrats was not something that we could have predicted. This species is not in the Fire Response database, although some Restio spp. are known to be killed by fire. This contributes greatly to the visual changes in the landscape. The great proliferation of Lance Leaf Geebung (Persoonia lanceolata) has also changed the landscape amenity (Fig 1, bottom).

To summarise, the 2012 burn has not yet restored ESBS, but has produced a species mix which may or may not recover to a more typical ESBS assemblage with ongoing management over time. Given that the area had not been burned for 60 years, it may be decades before complete restoration.

Our further studies on the use of clearing and thinning on North Head as an alternative to fire (“Asset Protection Zone Programme”), indicates that thinning and planting can produce a vegetation community acceptable for asset protection fire management and potentially nearly as rich as unmanaged post-fire communities (Fig 4). It is necessary to actively manage these sites by removing fire-prone species every two years. In addition, a trial has been started to test whether total trimming of all except protected species to nearly ground level in an APZ, is an option for longer-term management.

Fig 3. “Thinning Experiment” fenced quadrat #3 in July 2019. The quadrat was created in 2013 by removing Coastal Teatree (Leptospermum laevigatum) and Tree Broom Heath (Monotoca elliptica). The experimental design is a test of raking and seeding, with each treatment in the longer rows. All non-endangered species plants were trimmed to 0.25 metres height in mid-2017. (Photo Geoff Lambert)

Lessons learned and future directions. It is too early to say whether we can maintain and/or restore North Head’s ESBS with a single fire. Further fires may be required. A similar conclusion has been drawn by the Centennial Parklands Trust, with its small-scale fire experiments on the York Road site. We need new and better spot- and broad-scale surveys and further burns in other areas on North Head over a longer period. The spring 2019 survey, just completed, offers an opportunity to better assess the notion that fire is beneficial and necessary.

It will be necessary to monitor the effects of future fires on ESBS diversity closely and for much longer than five years. More active management of the post-fire vegetation may be needed, as we have previously discussed in the feature, and as happens at Golf Club sites (also see video) .

The 2012 burn was relatively “cool”. There is some evidence that “hot” burns (such as have been carried out by NSW Fire and Rescue at some Eastern Suburbs golf courses) may produce improved restoration of ESBS. The 2018 burn on North Head was planned as a “hot” burn. This was not completely achieved, but we may be able to compare “hot” and “cool” burn patches within it.

Fig 4. A 2017 UAV image of quadrat 23 five years after the 2012 burn. The image has been rotated to show the quadrat aligned on the UTM grid. The red square shows the rabbit-proof fences; the black square shows the survey quadrat and the blue squares show the four 1×1 metre vegetation plots. The resolution is approximately 5 mm. (Photo University of Sydney Centre for Field Robotics)

Stakeholders. Sydney Harbour Federation Trust, North Head Sanctuary Foundation. Australian Wildlife Conservancy, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Fire & Rescue NSW.

Funding Bodies. Foundation for National Parks & Wildlife [Grant No. 11.47], Sydney Harbour Federation Trust, Australian Wildlife Conservancy.

Contact Information. Dr G.A.Lambert, Secretary, North Head Sanctuary Foundation, (P.O.Box 896, BALGOWLAH 2093, Tel: +61 02 9949 3521, +61 0437 854 025, Email: G.Lambert@iinet.net.au. Web: https://www.northheadsanctuaryfoundation.org.au/

Still repairing wetlands of the Lower Murray: continuing the learning – UPDATE of EMR feature

Anne Jensen

[Update to EMR feature – Jensen, Anne (2002) Repairing wetlands of the Lower Murray: Learning from restoration practice. Ecological Management & Restoration, 3:1, 5-14. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1442-8903.2002.00092.x]

Key words:         Environmental water requirements, regeneration, wetlands, black box seedlings, Lower Murray Valley

Figure 1. Location of the Lower Murray Valley in South Australia (Map A. Jensen)

Introduction. As highlighted in the original EMR feature this summary is updating, in the Lower Murray Valley 1100 wetlands have been identified in 250 hydrologically-linked complexes (Fig. 1). They have undergone major changes to their water regime over the last 100 years, altering the timing, frequency and duration of floods. Wetlands at lower elevations have become permanently flooded by stable river levels and wetlands at higher elevations are ‘droughted’ by much reduced flooding. All would benefit from environmental watering, to fill gaps in breeding and regeneration cycles.

Our 2002 feature showed that, from 1998 to 2002, the not-for-profit conservation company Wetland Care Australia coordinated on-ground projects to repair priority wetlands in the Lower Murray. The Gurra Gurra project was the largest of these projects, with engineering works at 17 sites to restore multiple flowpaths through the 3000 ha floodplain complex.

Key funding from the National Heritage Trust terminated in 2002 and Wetland Care Australia relocated in 2003 to northern New South Wales, where project funding for wetland projects was still available. However, individuals involved with the Wetland Care Australia projects remained in the Lower Murray Valley in other jobs, so the intellectual property was retained and wetland conservation activities continued.

In 2002, the extent and severity of drought conditions in the Murray River Valley were just being recognised. By 2004, a survey estimated that >75% of the two main tree dominants in floodplain woodlands –  River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and Black Box (E. largiflorens)  – were dead, dying or extremely stressed along 700 km of the Murray River Valley . The Millenium Drought (2000-2010) caused extreme stress to both ecological and human communities. Government agencies commenced emergency environmental watering from 2004 through the Living Murray program to limit catastrophic damage at eight iconic sites but millions of mature eucalypts were lost from floodplain woodlands along river valleys.

The Millenium Drought changed the governance context radically, with the Water Act 2007 establishing a new Murray-Darling Basin Authority and the Basin Plan. The Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder (CEWH) was able to purchase water for environmental use.

Nature delivered life-saving floods in 2010-12, which broke the drought and sent flows through the Gurra Gurra complex flowpaths, so the works completed back in 2000 finally fulfilled their function (Fig. 2). Water flowed through the pipes at Tortoise Crossing for 170 days in 2010-11 and again for 71 days in 2012.

Figure 2. The sign at the key Tortoise Crossing flow path explains that replacing three pipes with 160 pipes back in 2000 now allows 50 times more flow when the river floods, as seen at the flood peak in December 2016 (Photos A. Jensen)

The sequence of floods led to mass germination of Black Box at medium floodplain elevations, with mass River Red Gum seedlings at lower elevations. A range of studies show that the survival of these seedlings is critical to fill age gaps and replace the losses from the Millenium Drought, as survival rates from germination events in the 1970s and 1990s were very poor and the last successful mass recruitment of Black Box in the Lower Murray Valley was from the 1955-56 floods.

Following the floods in 2010-2012, conditions were dry in 2013-15 and the fields of mass seedlings began to dry out and die. A further short flood in 2016 watered the surviving fields of Black Box seedlings for at least two weeks, adding to prospects of survival and flowing through the Tortoise Crossing pipes for 75 days. However, conditions in 2018-19 and into summer 2019-20 are once again extremely dry, with stress appearing in mature trees and saplings dying off. The Lower Murray Valley is still recovering from the Millenium Drought, thus needing more frequent watering over a sequence of years to bring mature trees back to health and full seed production, so this is a significant setback.

Further works and activities since 2002. Since 2008, the environmental charity Nature Foundation SA (NFSA) has been undertaking environmental watering projects on smaller, privately-owned sites in the Lower Murray, many from the original Wetland Care Australia list. In the Lower Murray Valley, water needs to be lifted up to 3 m from the river channel to reach wetlands on the floodplain, requiring costly energy. This is done using irrigation techniques, including pumps, pipes and sprinklers. These smaller projects complement government agency projects using major infrastructure to deliver environmental water to much larger wetland complexes.

In 2008-09, the primary purpose was to acquire water and use it to limit extreme environmental damage in the drought. In 2009 NFSA provided supplementary water for Little Duck Lagoon, one of the sites from the Wetland Care Australia Gurra Gurra project.

From 2012-19, NFSA has held a contract partnered with the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder (CEWH) to deliver up to 10 GL/y of environmental water to selected sites. A priority for the NFSA Water for Nature program has been to sustain the mass germination triggered by the 2010-12 floods, watering fields of seedlings and saplings so they can fill the very large gap in age structure of Black Box populations. Stressed mature Black Box trees are being watered to improve their condition and volumes of seed produced. While delivering water to a defined wetland is relatively simple, with water pumped to an inlet point and allowed to pool in the wetland, watering scattered fields of seedlings and saplings on relatively flat floodplain land is a challenge, especially when they are in gaps between mature trees. The solution has been to use high-throw sprinklers (simulating rainfall) and operating them at night, to allow soakage into clay soils and to avoid evaporative loss during the day.

Since 2008, NFSA has delivered almost 13 GL of water to 97 watering sites in 20 wetland complexes, covering 27 different ecological targets across 12 habitat types. A total of 4.9 GL was delivered to 15 sites in 2017-18 and 1.55 GL was delivered in 2018-19 to 25 sites covering 126 ha. Rolling 5-year watering plans have been developed for each site, able to respond to annual water availability, Basin-wide priorities, environmental water requirements, climatic conditions, site watering history and feasibility of delivery.

One of the NFSA sites is Lyrup Lagoon in the Gurra Gurra complex, being watered to reduce accumulated salinity from groundwater inflows. Importantly, the infrastructure of the Central Irrigation Trust was used to deliver water to the lagoon. Thus, local irrigators are partners in delivery of water for regional environmental benefits and river health.

Figure 3. Watering guidelines developed by the Water For Nature program for stressed and healthy woodlands, for (a) River Red Gum and (b) Black Box (Water for Nature).

Further Results. The initial watering guidelines reported in the original EMR feature have been expanded through research and monitoring of responses to watering events, developing guidelines for timing and frequency of wetting and drying cycles to promote recovery in mature trees and support germination and survival of seedlings. These have been applied for each site in the rolling 5-year watering plans, which then determine the annual list of sites due for watering (see NFSA 5 year strategy and Fig. 3).

Watering by NFSA 2013-2019 has sustained Black Box seedlings and saplings through four dry summers, with watered plants 2-3 times taller than non-watered plants (Fig. 4). The Water For Nature monitoring report shows that, at NFSA sites, mature Black Box trees that have received periodic environmental water as determined by their 5-year watering plan during 2015-2019 were 21-46% (average 36%) better in health than adjacent non-watered sites, with denser, more vigorous canopies and the relative improvement was greatest during hotter and drier periods. The watering events thus provided water between natural floods to sustain growth in saplings and crop cycles in mature trees. Watering at other NFSA sites has provided vital habitat for vulnerable and endangered fauna including the Murray Hardyhead (Craterocephalus fluviatilis), Southern Bell Frog (Litoria raniformis), Regent Parrot (Polytelis anthopeplus) and Latham’s Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii).

Figure 4. Watered River Red Gum saplings at Thiele Flat, Loxton; November 2013 (top) and March 2018 (bottom). Note 2016 flood level mark on foreground trees (Photos A. Jensen)

Lessons learned and future directions. The significant benefits of environmental water have been demonstrated at NFSA’s Water For Nature sites, for floodplain vegetation communities and in temporary wetlands. Evolving research indicates that watering in late spring-early summer mimics peak flows in the natural water regime, coinciding with highest chances of breeding and germination events and thus ecologically ideal timing (See bibliography). Benefits are increased if seasonally filled wetlands are topped up in early summer, to ensure sufficient duration to sustain frog and waterbird breeding.

As well as ideal timing, studies have shown that watering at any time of the year can be beneficial, including enhancing soil moisture storage in the unsaturated zone and sustaining volume in bud and fruit crops. A key finding has been that watering in late autumn-early winter sustains soil moisture, priming sites to give an enhanced response to watering in the following spring-summer.

However, dry climatic conditions and political pressures to minimise water recovery volumes are combining to reduce availability of environmental water, with only very highest priority sites likely to receive water in the 2019-20 water year. Environmental water cannot create floods, it can only provide water to selected priority sites during dry times and enhance the benefits of any natural floods. Current volumes can only meet the requirements of a limited number of sites, leaving many sites without the water needed to sustain them through dry times or to recover from the severe impact of the Millenium drought.

Bureaucratic processes for approvals also hinder effective delivery of environmental water. With the water year coinciding with the financial year from July to June, water delivery stops in June to allow water accounts to be finalised. Approval to water in the following year can take 2-3 months, meaning no water can be delivered during the winter months for priming, missing the advantage of low evaporation rates and higher chances of piggy-backing on rainfall events.

Funding for environmental projects tends to be short term, leading to job insecurity for project managers, loss of continuity and project knowledge, and inability to complete watering sequences. Very significant volunteer resources are required to make these watering projects happen, including inputs from landholders who have donated electricity connections to the floodplain, transported diesel to re-fuel pumps, loaned pumps, tractors and irrigation equipment, plus use of irrigation and local government infrastructure to deliver water, and physical assistance and maintenance from local volunteer groups.

Practical on-ground watering knowledge is maturing well; what is needed now is sufficient water and ongoing consistent funding to support projects to deliver minimum environmental water requirements for the wetlands of the Lower Murray Valley. The pipes at Tortoise Crossing, installed in 2000 and only flooded twice, are more than ready for the next high flows to pour through!

Stakeholders and Funding bodies. The monitoring project was supported as part of the project Ecological Responses to Environmental Watering in the South Australian River Murray Valley, assessing the benefits of salinity interception schemes on floodplain vegetation, coordinated by Australian Water Environments for SA Water from March 2015 to June 2017. Continuing funding for monitoring in 2017-2019 was provided in a grant from the Ian Potter Foundation to Nature Foundation SA, as well as funding from the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder (2018-19). Water for the environmental watering projects studied here was provided through annual allocations of water from the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office to Nature Foundation SA.  Water delivery was managed by the NFSA Water For Nature program through Program Manager Natalie Stalenberg. Practical support and site access was provided by Steve Clark, landholder and committee member for Water for Nature program, and landholders John and Bronwyn Burford.

Contact. Dr Anne Jensen, Environmental Consultant; Volunteer member, Water for Nature Committee, Nature Foundation SA; part-time consultant Wetland Ecologist for Water for Nature Program of Nature Foundation SA (7 Ford Street, Maylands SA 5069, Australia; Tel: +61 407 170 706; Email: ajensen@internode.on.net

Registration of domestic cats on Christmas Island, Indian Ocean: stage one to an eradication program for stray and feral cats to mitigate social and environmental impacts – UPDATE of EMR feature

 David Algar, Neil Hamilton and Caitlyn Pink

[Update to EMR article: Algar, David, Stefanie Hilmer, Don Nickels and Audrey Nickels (2011) Successful domestic cat neutering: first step towards eradicating cats on Christmas Island for wildlife protection. Ecological Management & Restoration, 12:2, 93-101. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1442-8903.2011.00594.x]

Key words: domestic and feral cats, eradication program, cat de-sexing and registration, cat management, pet cat survey, local cat legislation

Figure 1. Stray cat on Christmas Island (Photo Neil Hamilton DBCA)

Introduction: In 2010 a ‘’Cat Management Plan’’ was commissioned by the various land management agencies on Christmas Island to mitigate the environmental and social impacts of cats (Felis catus) on the island (Fig 1). These impacts included contributing towards the decline of a number of native species through predation, as well as being a source of Toxoplasmosis gondii, a parasite that can lead to serious human health complications.

The plan proposed a strategy to eradicate cats entirely from the island as the domestic population died out and was adopted in late 2010. The essential first stage of the management plan was therefore the registration of all domestic cats. As part of this plan, amendments to the Local Cat Management Laws (Shire of Christmas Island Local Law for the Keeping and Control of Cats 2004 (WA)) under the Local Government Act 1995 (WA) were endorsed in August 2010. These revisions required that all domestic cats in the Shire of Christmas Island were legally bound to be de-sexed, tattooed, microchipped and registered with the Shire. The revisions were designed to limit domestic and stray/feral cat impact on the native fauna, promote responsible cat ownership, compliance and enforcement of cat management laws and prohibit the importation of new cats. Micro-chipping of domestic cats would enable the identification of those animals during trapping campaigns for stray and feral cats, so that they could be released rather than destroyed. De-sexing would prevent potential natal recruitment into the domestic, stray and feral populations. A survey of domestic cats was conducted prior to the veterinary program in October 2010 (see original feature), to guarantee that all domestic cats would be registered. One hundred and fifty-two cats were recorded during the initial survey in October 2010 of which 136 were registered as domestic pets.

Figure 2. Red-tailed Tropic-Bird with chick May 2012. (Photo Neil Hamilton DBCA)

Further works undertaken: Two further veterinary visits were conducted in May 2011 and 2012 following the domestic cat surveys to complete the veterinary program. Subsequent domestic cat surveys have been conducted each May in 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. In 2016 prior to the domestic cat survey, it came to our attention that a number of un-registered cats were being kept as pets. It was decided by the ‘’Christmas Island Cat Eradication Steering Committee’’ that a short-term amnesty on pet cat ownership be invoked so that these animals could also be de-sexed and registered. Following this amnesty, a final veterinary program was endorsed and fines were still issued to those residents who wanted their otherwise illegal cat to be de-sexed and registered, or unregistered cats could be handed in and euthanased without charge. Further domestic cat surveys were conducted in May 2017 and October 2018.

Further results to date: Since October 2010, 184 cats have been registered following the various veterinary programs. The survey conducted in 2018 recorded 66 registered cats remaining. The total number of domestic cats registered each year, the sex population structure, the number of new registrations and number deregistered are presented in Table 1, with the decline of two-thirds relatively steady over the years.

Table 1. Total number of domestic cats registered each year, the sex structure, the number of new registrations and number de-registered.

Date No. registered New/re-registers De-registers
  Total Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male
October 2010 N/A N/A N/A 136 66 70 N/A N/A N/A
May 2011 138 69 69 18 10 8 16 7 9
May 2012 135 66 69 12 5 7 15 8 7
May 2013 111 53 58 0 0 0 24 13 11
May 2014 101 50 51 0 0 0 10 5 5
May 2015 87 45 42 0 0 0 14 5 9
May 2016 75 41 34 2 1 1 14 5 9
June 2016 93 49 44 18 8 10 0 0 0
May 2017 74 38 36 1 0 1 20 11 9
October 2018 66 36 30 0 0 0 8 2 6

Lessons learned and future directions: At the conclusion of the domestic cat survey in 2018, there were 66 registered cats present on the island. An additional seven domestic cats are known to have died before the planned 2019 domestic cat survey. Death of registered cats over the past nine years has been caused by a number of factors including: road fatalities; old age; disease; requests for cats to be euthanased for a variety of reasons and cats exported back to the mainland.

Domestic cats will remain on Christmas Island for a number of years, with the youngest cat approximately three years of age. Initially, as reported in the 2011 feature, it was predicted that the island would be domestic cat-free by 2024 however, this is unlikely given the subsequent and final veterinary program in 2016.

Further amendments to the island’s cat local laws were adopted in 2018, following consultation with the community and the Christmas Island Cat Eradication Steering Committee. This included an increase in penalties for illegal unregistered cats and compulsory transfer of ownership procedures to prevent future movement of registered pet cats into the designated pet cat prohibited zone. This zone protects nesting habitat for the ground-nesting Red-tailed Tropic Bird (Phaethon rubricauda, Fig 2.), where cat predation led to 90% failure of fledgling rates pre-control. Subsequent cat management in this zone has been successful in improving fledgling survival (See 2012 report).

There are several benefits of repeating the domestic cat survey each year as pet numbers decline: continue program awareness to all residents; maintain community support and involvement; offer pet health advice; thoroughly check for illegal cats to report to the Shire and respond to stray cat reports within the township. This continued effort will help ensure there is little opportunity or temptation to obtain new kittens as illegal pets while later stages of the eradication are progressing, and responsible cat ownership is maintained until the domestic cat population has died out.

The goal of eradicating cats remains highly relevant and is supported by the island community, local land management agencies and the federal government. The feasibility of long-term success is high and the outcome is likely to provide valuable lessons for other jurisdictions with social and environmental issues surrounding the presence of feral and domestic cats.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies: This is a collaborative project between Western Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions and Parks Australia. The authors would like to thank Parks Australia, Christmas Island Phosphates, Shire of Christmas Island, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development and Australian Border Force for their financial, in-kind and logistical support. Special thanks to Robert Muller, Khaleisha Amin and Chris Su for their assistance in annual surveys. The warm welcome and assistance of the whole Christmas Island community during all domestic cat surveys has been appreciated.

Contact information: David Algar, Biodiversity and Conservation Science, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (Locked Bag 104, Bentley Delivery Centre, Western Australia, Australia 6983) Email: dave.algar@dbca.wa.gov.au

 

 

Butterfly population persists 10 years after emergency habitat restoration and translocation – UPDATE to EMR feature

[Update to 2008 EMR feature  –  Raymond Mjadwesch and Simon Nally (2008) Emergency relocation of a Purple Copper Butterfly colony during roadworks: Successes and lessons learned. Ecological Management & Restoration,  9:2, 100-109.   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-8903.2008.00400.x]

By Simon Nally and Raymond Mjadwesch

Fig 1.  The endangered Purple Copper Butterfly (Paralucia spinifera) (Photo Raymond Mjadwesch)

Key wordsParalucia spinifera, Purple Copper Butterfly, reintroduction, invertebrate, threatened species.

Introduction: As reported in the original EMR feature, the unintended destruction of the habitat of a population of the endangered Purple Copper Butterfly (Paralucia spinifera, Fig 1) north of Lithgow, Australia in 2004, precipitated a bold, innovative, and rapid emergency program of habitat restoration and butterfly larvae translocation.

A stand of the butterfly’s larval host plants, Blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa subsp. lasiophylla), had been largely destroyed to enable road construction (Fig 2a). The butterflies had commenced emerging from their nearly nine-month-long pupation in the attendant ant’s (Anonychomyrma itinerans) underground nests to find an absence of host plants.

Construction work ceased immediately, and supplementary Blackthorn plants were planted throughout the area of predicted butterfly emergence. The Blackthorn were planted in their pots, to allow for later removal and replanting in the area where the habitat was being restored.  The Blackthorn were sugar-baited to attract the attendant ant as the ant was assumed to affect the male butterfly’s selection of home ranges, and ultimately, egg-laying on these larval host plants. Concurrently with the provision of Blackthorn for egg-laying, an adjoining degraded area of potential habitat was treated for infestations of woody weeds and growth of emergent Eucalyptus trees that excluded Blackthorn or blocked sunlight, precluding its suitability for occupation by the species.  Once weeds were controlled, Blackthorn was established in this area using tube-stock planting.

Attendant ants were enticed to all the Blackthorn introduced to the site, male butterflies established territories and were successful at attracting females with whom to mate, and these females laid eggs on the Blackthorn. The project partners were relieved at these initial results! However, as much of the site was to be permanently destroyed due to road construction, this temporarily reprieved population had to be translocated.

Over 12 nights, 1,260 of the facultatively nocturnal larvae were collected (along with any associated attendant ants) as they emerged to feed on Blackthorn leaves and translocated to the newly created habitat established on an adjacent restoration area (Fig 2b). Each translocated larva was monitored until it was attended by ants (again attracted to the recipient habitat using a sugar bait). Further monitoring continued to confirm continued growth of larvae until pupation was assumed to occur.

The duration of the emergency habitat restoration and translocation activities from first discovery of the habitat destruction to the assumed pupation of the translocated larvae in the newly established habitat (Fig 3) was less than five months.

After the autumn and winter pupation period, the project partners were delighted to find butterflies emerging, mating, and laying eggs on the remaining restored habitat, one year after the initial habitat destruction was first detected. Monitoring of larval numbers during 2005-2008, which involved systematic nocturnal inspection of all Blackthorn plants at the site, indicated that the population was secure and had grown after an initial reduction in calculated numbers in the first year after translocation.

Figure 2a. 2004 – The site as found showing the extent of habitat destruction (when the butterfly and habitat loss was initially detected). (Photo Raymond Mjadwesch)

Figure 2b. 2005 – Larvae from yellow-delineated area were translocated (after temporary introduction) into the blue-delineated area and bushland further right. (Photo Raymond Mjadwesch)

Monitoring update: In 2013 and 2015 monitoring reverted to an area search method, counting flying butterflies – a technique routinely used to indicate butterfly distribution / areas of activity at each of the other known populations. In 2015, ten years after the emergency translocation and habitat restoration, 48 butterflies were observed in the restored habitat, the second highest number recorded for this site.

Note that the results of monitoring counts can vary with date of survey relative to the flying period, time of day, and weather conditions on the day, and represent an indicator of presence and activity rather than a measure of absolute abundance. During some years multiple monitoring events occurred; in 2013 and 2015 there was only a single monitoring count.

There have been no further nocturnal larvae counts since the culmination of the project.

A 2019 site assessment identified the need for further woody weed maintenance works (which has been ongoing in the interim, funded by the LLS) to avoid potential degradation of the habitat quality due to competition with and shading of the host plant, Blackthorn.  Longer term maintenance of this site may require active management to ensure persistence of Blackthorn either through burning or mechanical damage to Blackthorn to promote re-sprouting from the rootstock and juvenile leaf production. Juvenile leaves lack the hairy indumentum present on the lower surfaces of intermediate and adult Blackthorn leaves, and have been observed to be preferentially skeletonized by early-instar larvae.

The 2019 site inspection also revealed that powerline easement works had resulted in weedicide spraying of eucalypt (Eucalyptus ssp.) saplings throughout the restored habitat, with Blackthorn plants and other native plant species affected.

Figure 3a – the site in 2005, after restoration works were complete, showing the initial flush of pioneer species after soil disturbance and restoration. (Photo Raymond Mjadwesch)

Figure 3b – the site in 2019 showing the final shrubby understory of sedges and shrubs (including scattered Blackthorn) typical of the locally native open forest community. (Photo Raymond Mjadwesch)

Lessons learned and future directions: Several factors contributed to the success of the habitat restoration and translocation program, some of which were of notable serendipity. It was extremely fortunate that the species was detected within the affected area (after the initial survey of the site had failed to detect habitat for the species); that Blackthorn tube-stock (upon which the restoration relied) was available; that an area considered likely to support Purple Copper Butterfly suitable for rehabilitation lay adjacent to the affected area; and that the timing of the damage in the annual lifecycle of the species allowed the partners to work with the opportunity to establish larval food plants  when it was required.

However, we believe that it was human factors that fundamentally combined to create the environment for success:

  • the commitment of the NSW Roads and Maritime Services (then the RTA) to immediately and fully support restoration works to ameliorate the damage and maximize the chances of the population surviving in the long term, including changing the design of the works to reduce the extent of permanent damage, and the funding of the restoration, translocation, and monitoring activities.
  • the project partners, including the authors, the RTA, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers, and Lithgow LandCare unified in collaboration, ceasing other activities to direct all necessary effort to maximize chances of success.
  • the quick, resourceful and bold action to trial and implement innovative techniques that were risky and speculative, such as luring attendant ants to planted Blackthorn using sugar, trial translocating attendant ants, and translocating larvae.
  • that there had been sufficient field observations to  predict the likely behavior of butterflies and larvae and to predict the likely response of the species’ habitat to management intervention.

We encourage restoration practitioners to immerse themselves in the environments they intend to manipulate, and ponder on the behavior, function, and interactions between each element of the ecosystem before them. When choosing to act – to intervene – to manipulate, do so sensitively to what you both know and feel that you have learned in the field, and act decisively, quickly, and boldly. Most importantly, corral a team of partners who believe in the endeavor and who fully commit their support to each other for a common restoration objective.

Endnote: In September 2019, an unplanned fire burnt much of the site. Given the monitoring data available for this site, further monitoring to study the effect of fire on the species and its habitat is being considered.

 Stakeholders and Funding bodies:   NSW Roads and Traffic Authority (now NSW Roads and Maritime), NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (now NSW Office of Environment and Heritage), Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers, Lithgow LandCare, Australian Government Department of Environment and Energy

Contact information: Simon Nally, 8 Gurney Place PAGE ACT, Australia, Tel: +61 407870234, Email: suseandsimon@bigpond.com. Ray Mjadwesch, Mjadwesch Environmental Service and Support, 26 Keppel Street, Bathurst, NSW 2795 Australia, Tel: +61 423949789, Email:  ray@mjadweschenvironmental.com.au