Bridging the Gaps: Community Created Post-Storm Fauna Crossings

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

Joanne Isaac

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Figure 2. Bridge installation. © ERA

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exploring “bottom up” approaches to ecosystem repair in Victoria’s Central Goldfields

Chris Pocknee

Figure 1. An example of severely degraded box-ironbark. (Photo Paul Foreman)

Introduction. Box-Ironbark forests are an important ecosystem for biodiversity in southern Australia providing critical habitat for threatened species including Swift Parrots and Regent Honeyeaters. With over 83% of the original box-ironbark forests cleared and much of the remaining area degraded, the box-ironbark forests are one of the most endangered ecosystems in Australia. The box-ironbark forests of the Central Goldfields in Victoria have been severely degraded by gold mining in the 1900s and by forestry activities (Fig. 1).

This project explores a suite of interventions including nest box installation, ecological thinning, soil contour ripping, targeted revegetation and gully ponding. The interventions are intended to restore the hydrology and begin to repair the function of the entire ecosystem from the bottom up (Fig. 2). Biolinks Alliance collected baseline ecological data. These data and the BACI (Before-After-Control-Impact) experimental design will allow thorough assessment of the impacts of the interventions.

Figure 2. An example of the desired outcome. (Photo Paul Foreman)

The project site is within Spring Plains Nature Conservation Reserve (NCR) less than 10 km south-east of the town of Heathcote and is managed by Parks Victoria. Peter’s Gully, the treatment site  is 138 Ha and the control site, White’s Gully, is 140 Ha (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. The project site within Spring Plains NCR .

Works undertaken. To address the lack of natural tree hollows across the site, 200 nest boxes were installed, 100 in both the control and the treatment gully. These boxes are specifically designed for use by brush-tailed phascogales (Phascogale tapoatafa) and Krefft’s gliders (Petaurus notatus) and have been monitored every three months since their installation in August 2022.

Ecological thinning was undertaken across 76.7 ha of the treatment site, with an approximate reduction in tree basal area of 40-75% within thinned areas. Thinning is intended to increase the amount of light reaching the understorey, and decrease the amount of competition for soil nutrients and water, thereby increasing the growth rate of the remaining trees to enhance their natural habitat value. Thinnings were laid down along contour lines where possible to impede overland water flow and create microsites for organic material and seeds to build up. The woody debris also created ground-level habitat for small animals (Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Before (above) and after (below) photos taken in September of 2022 and 2023 showing ecological thinning in Peter’s Gully. (Photo Cameron O’Mara).

Contour lines were ripped to a depth of approximately 30 cm along 71.6 km within the treatment gully, and seeds of local provenance wallaby-grasses (Joycea pallida and Rytidosperma spp.) were directly sown into the rip-lines (Fig. 5). Ripping along contour lines is intended to increase water infiltration into the soil rather than running off downslope, and creates areas with much higher rates of seed germination.

Figure 5.  Seed germination rates in rip lines are high compared to adjacent areas (Photo Cameron O’Mara).

Twenty-one small, shallow ‘ponds’ with leaky weirs were constructed through the gully bottom using timber felled during thinning. This is intended to slow water movement, increase moisture availability to the ecosystem, minimise the loss of top-soil and leaf litter to fast flowing water, and reduce the erosion that occurs during heavy rains. Semi-aquatic rushes and grasses were planted around the ponds to promote stability and re-establish these species across the site.

Results to date. It is too early to have meaningful data on ecological outcomes, as the first round of post-intervention monitoring is still in progress and we expect to see changes unfold over a number of years. We have already observed reduced run-off of water and sediment following heavy rain in the treatment site compared with the control site, although this has not yet been formally quantified.

Recent post-treatment reptile survey results are promising. We recorded 7 individuals from two skink species (Lerista bougainvillii and Lampropholis guichenoti) in tile surveys in the treatment site compared with one individual L. bougainvillii in the control site. Nest box monitoring has revealed a high occupancy rate across the 12 months since installation, with 94% of boxes showing signs of small mammal occupancy (i.e. either animals present or a nest) within 6 months, and 99% after 12 months. We counted a minimum of 604 Krefft’s gliders using these boxes in September 2023, and 22 boxes being used by phascogales.

Lessons learned and future directions. The biggest hurdle to implementing this project was the approval process. We have now been through the process successfully and have a clear idea of how to best approach it in the future. This project requires ongoing monitoring to assess impacts on ecosystem function. There may be a role for targeted threatened species work, such as the reintroduction of missing threatened flora to the site.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies. This project has been funded by the R. E. Ross Trust, Brian D. Newman Foundation, Ian Potter Foundation, private philanthropists, DEECA Nature Fund, and Parks Victoria Volunteer Innovation Fund. We acknowledge Parks Victoria as a partner on this project, and the support from Taungurung Land and Water Council, City of Greater Bendigo, the Victorian Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA), Goulburn-Murray Water and the North-Central Catchment Management Authority.

Contact: Chris Pocknee, Ecologist – Biolinks Alliance. Email: chris.pocknee@biolinksalliance.org.au

Facilitated natural regeneration in the ‘Middle clearing (Setaria plots)’ of Minyumai Indigenous Protected Area, The Gap NSW

Minyumai Rangers

Figure 1. Aerial view of the Setaria-dominated clearing at Minyuma IPA prior to restoration work . The trial area arrowed is the location of the preliminary trial of herbiciding plus fire followed by regular spot spraying of weed regrowth. The project was then expanded to much of clearing to the left of the artificial drain running through the centre of the site (Photo Minyuma IPA)

Introduction. ‘Minyumai’ is an approx. 2000ha property owned by Minyumai Landholding Aboriginal Corporation (MLHAC) and managed by the MLAC board and the Minyumai Rangers. The property is located on the far north coast of NSW, adjacent to Bundjalung National Park and Tabbimoble Nature Reserve and was dedicated as an Indigenous Protected Area (IPA) in 2011. 

The property is largely comprised of native ecosystems, including five Endangered Ecological Communities (EECs), however it has a history of grazing in largely three sizeable clearings.  The largest and most degraded of these clearings (the ‘middle clearing’) (Figs. 1 and 2) became known to the Rangers as the ‘Setaria plots’ as it was almost completely devoid of trees, was dominated by the introduced pasture grass Setaria (Setaria sphacelata) and was subsequently divided into multiple plots for treatment and monitoring.

Figure 2. Closer view of the density and cover of Setaria at the site prior to treatment. (Photo Minyuma IPA)

The purpose of the work in the Setaria plots is to convert the vegetation from weed dominance to dominance by native species of the site’s prior ‘Swamp sclerophyll forest on coastal floodplains’ EEC. The project started in 2014 and is an ongoing part of the Ranger’s regular works program. 

Works undertaken. After a successful trial sponsored by Firesticks in an adjacent area, a facilitated natural regeneration approach was adopted in the Setaria plots, supplemented by some tree planting. While there were little or no above-ground natives evident among the mature Setaria at the start of the project (Fig 2), the Firesticks trial showed that the use of fire followed by precision weed spraying would result in at least some regeneration of native ground covers from the soil seed bank.

Figure 3. Firebreaks were installed at the site prior to spraying and burning and remain maintained to allow for ongoing use of fire during over time should it prove beneficial. (Photo Minyuma IPA)
Figure 4. Minyumai Rangers and visitors from a neighbouring IPA running a burn on the site. (Photo Minyuma IPA)

The plot-by-plot approach subsequently adopted involved creating firebreaks, overspraying the mature setaria with 1% glyphosate and subsequent burning of the dried weed biomass (Figs 3 and 4).  Subsequent follow-up spot-spraying was then systematically and regularly carried out.

Monitoring.  The project offered an opportunity to separate and compare burn and spray treatments with spray-only treatments – i.e.  all plots (except untreated controls) were subjected to systematic weed management but some were additionally burnt.  Species counts and cover was measured at 2 years of age and again at 4 years of age – with the ground stratum monitored using 15 quadrats (7 burn+spray, 6 spray only and 3 controls) and woody cover monitored using 18  (20m) transects (line intercepts).

Figure 5. Photopoint monitoring showing changes at the site over a 3 year period showing treatments and gradual regeneration of natives. (Photos Minyuma IPA)

Results to date.  While the initial follow up treatments revealed extensive weed, this rapidly transitioned to native dominance over time (Fig 5) and with fairly rigorous herbicide treatment of all weed by the Rangers.  The site developed high levels of cover within 18 months. A total of  37 native species were recorded over the four years (including 5 trees, 2 shrubs,  1 vine, 18 forbs, 7 sedges and 4 grasses) .  A total of 26 weed species (1 shrub, 14 forbs, 2 sedges and 9 grasses) occurred and while weed cover reduced over time ) most species of weed remained present in the system.  

The quadrat data showed that the fire plus spot-spraying treatment resulted in improved native cover in the ground stratum (scoring an average of 3.38 on a 5 level cover scale)  compared to spot-spraying alone (scoring an average of 2.17 on the 5-level cover scale) with the controls remaining in the lowest cover level.

Transect monitoring of woody species cover over time showed a significant increase in tree cover after both fire plus spray (n=5)  and spray alone (n=9) treatments compared to the untreated controls (n=4) but there was no significant difference between the burn plus spray and spray only  treatments, which is understandable as none of the tree species form soil seed banks.

Figure 6.  Drone photo of the same quadrats from the air in August 2023, nine years after the work commenced. The dense green tree growth in the middle of the photo is all regrowth on the treated plots. Between this area and the intact Paperbark forest in the further distance there is a band of untreated land still dominated by Setaria and without native colonisation. (Note the Eucalypt circled is the same Eucalypt in the right hand background of the photos in Figure 5.)   (Photo G. Little)

Changes over time. The sedges, which were initially abundant in the understorey,  became less abundant over the two readings. Native grasses were initially far less common but increased over time, and 10 years on are still far less prevalent than sedges, which makes sense considering the wetland nature of the site.

Some  forbs, such as Buttercups (Ranunculus spp.), Gotu Kola (Centella asiatica), Pennyworts (Hydryocotyle spp.), Kidney Weed (Dichondra repens) and Native St Johns Wort (Hypericum perforatum) became frequent or abundant and remained so over the monitoring period. while other forbs such as Grass Lily (Murdannia graminea), Ludwigia (Ludwigia and Native Bluebell (Wahlenbergia sp.) remained uncommon or even rare.

Over the 10 years since the project began, the tree species Swamp Box (Lophosptemon suaveolens), Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca) and Broad-leaved Paperbark (Melaleuca quinquinervia) have all become markedly more abundant over time through colonisation from the surrounding forest (Fig. 6) – with natural regeneration far outweighing any tree planting efforts made at the start of the project.  Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) did not however increase from the remnant tree on site nor did planted seedlings of this species survive.   

Lessons learned and future directions.  When comparing the treated areas with untreated areas it is clear that the native tree colonisaton is confined to the treated areas. Although the treated areas developed high native herbaceous cover it is likely that the open niches created by the weed control and fire allowed colonisation by trees, while the dense Setaria cover prevented regrowth. 

A major challenge has been the presence of wild cattle on the property that have proved resistant to capture. This required electric fencing of the site for some years to avoid damage to plantings, although natural regeneration has now overtaken the plantings.

Critical to success was rigorous follow up prior to the weed reseeding.  Complete avoidance of reseeding was not always possible due to funding limitations or personnel changes. This has resulted in some reinvasion of Setaria in some of the plots, although the Rangers continue to manage the site well. 

As the mown firebreaks are still in place, there is potential for cool fire to be reintroduced into the site (followed by further weed control) should this be considered ecologically beneficial.  The site may also benefit from a project (being conducted in collaboration with Nature Glenelg Trust) to fill in the artificial drain visible in Fig 1.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies.  We acknowledge the valuable contributions of all the Minyumai IPA Rangers, particularly the early leadership of Minyumai Rangers, Daniel Gomes, Justin Gomes and Belinda Gomes. The Commonwealth Government’s IPA program funded the delivery of biodiversity management services by MLHAC, and funding and advice for the fire trials was provided by the NSW Nature Conservation Council’s  Firesticks initiative, with advice from Oliver Costello and Richard Brittingham. Tein McDonald advised on techniques and monitoring and Andrew Johnston provided training for the Minyumai Rangers in the first years of the project.

Contact: Mary Wilson, Minyumai Land Holding Aboriginal Corporation. Email: <admin@minyumai.org.au>

Eradicating weeds along the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area coastline

Jon Marsden-Smedley

Figure 1. The project supports multiple bird species including the vulnerable (a) Hooded Plover, (b) Australian Pied Oystercatcher, (c) Sooty Oystercatcher and (c) the critically endangered Orange-bellied Parrot. (Photos J. Marsden-Smedley)

Introduction. The Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area (TWWHA) in the southwest of Tasmania is an important area for conservation. The coastline of this region has high natural integrity and is a major stronghold for a number of shore-nesting and feeding birds including the vulnerable Hooded Plover (Thinornis cucullatus), Australian Pied Oystercatcher (Haematopus longirostris), Sooty Oystercatcher (Haematopus fuliginosus) and the critically endangered Orange-bellied Parrot (Neophema chrysogaster) during its migration (Fig. 1). Three ecosystem-transforming weed species: Sea Spurge (Euphorbia paralias), Marram Grass (Ammophila arenaria) and Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus aggregate) have the potential to transform the coastline’s geomorphic structure and have been identified as major threats to environmental and cultural value. It is estimated that about 425 km of the 850 km coastline in the TWWHA is susceptible to Sea Spurge and / or Marram Grass invasion.

The WildCare volunteer group SPRATS (Sea sPurge Remote Area TeamS) has been undertaking annual weed management works along the TWWHA coastline between Cape Sorell (Macquarie Harbour) and Cockle Creek since 2006 (Fig. 1). SPRATS is a self-managing volunteer group working in partnership with the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service (PWS). The primary goal of the program is to initially control and then eradicate Sea Spurge and Marram Grass from the coastline (Figs 2-4). The secondary goal is to eradicate any Blackberry infestations found and monitor for other weeds.

Figure 2. The SPRATS work area.

Logistics. The SPRATS weeding program has divided the coastline into eight sectors. At the start of each weeding season, detailed maps are prepared showing weeding sites, campsites and walking routes. These data are uploaded into GPS units so that all groups can efficiently and easily locate previously recorded weed sites, campsites and walking routes. Teams of SPRATS volunteers walk each section of the coastline of the TWWHA annually. While undertaking weed control and monitoring, volunteers also record information on rare and threatened shorebird species, assist with research into the ecology of the region (e.g., collection of Tasmanian Devil scats for genetic analysis), record the location of Aboriginal cultural sites (e.g., petroglyphs, stone arrangements, middens and hut sites) and the usage of the area by other groups (e.g., quad bike riders).

Works undertaken. In the first three years of the program, weeding efforts were concentrated in the southernmost susceptible areas. Once these Sea Spurge infestations had been given an initial knock-down, efforts moved to very large infestations along 45 km of coast south of Cape Sorell. Work then expanded to include about 160 km of coastline in Macquarie Harbour.

Trials were conducted in 2009-2010 to compare both the kill rates of target species and impacts on non-target species of different herbicide treatments. These trials identified glyphosate mixed with Pulse® as the best herbicide treatment for Sea Spurge.

Different strategies have been utilised at different stages of the program. Heli-spraying operations have been used to knock down very large Sea Spurge infestations (i.e., infestations of > 250,000 plants) and the subsequent massive seed germination event. Two rounds of heli-spraying reduced the number of Sea Spurge plants by 90% and enabled subsequent hand weeding. The optimum technique identified for treating Marram Grass was to spot spray with Haloxyfop-R methyl ester and penetrant. This is followed up by hand weeding once weed densities are reduced.

A feature of the SPRATS work program is collection of geo-referenced data on all weeds removed,  along with targeted research into the most effective treatment methods. These data are used to demonstrate work effectiveness, plan annual work programs and report back to the PWS and other funding bodies.

A major development in the past two seasons has been testing and spreading the Sea Spurge biocontrol recently developed by the CSIRO. This biocontrol has the potential to provide a long term solution to the issues associated with Sea Spurge. From 2006 to 2022-23, 8504 work days have been completed, most of which has been volunteer effort.

Figure 3. A SPRATS volunteer standing in a patch of Sea Spurge at the Sassy Creek site in 2007. (Photo J. Marsden-Smedley)

Figure 4. The Sassy Creek site in 2021. (Photo J. Marsden-Smedley)

Results to date. Prior to the start of the program it was estimated that the TWWHA region contained about 11.1 million Sea Spurge plants and about 124 000 Marram Grass clumps located in over 700 sites. By 2022-2023 weeds had been mapped from over 850 sites, made up of about 700 Sea Spurge, 150 Marram Grass, four Blackberry, three Great Mullein and one Slender Thistle. To date the SPRATS program has removed over 14.4 million Sea Spurge plants (about 99.7%). In the 2022-2023 weeding season about 2795 clumps of Marram Grass were sprayed representing a 98% reduction on the pre-SPRATS number of marram grass clumps. The region’s known blackberry infestations have been eradicated.

Challenges. A major challenge is missed Sea Spurge sites. In its second year of growth, Sea Spurge produces a large number of seeds which then germinate or replenish seed banks. Seedlings from these reactivated sites are responsible for between a third and half of Sea Spurge plants treated and the rate at which SPRATS is reducing the number of Sea Spurge is slowing. It appears likely that there are an increasing number of Sea Spurge seeds washing in from very large infestations to the north of the TWWHA and also along the east coast of Tasmania. If the Sea Spurge biocontrol is found to be effective, this issue should be addressed by large scale spreading of the biocontrol agent which should reduce these very large infestations. It may also be necessary to do targeted releases of the biocontrol within the TWWHA.  

In the early years of SPRATS operations, treating Marram Grass was rated as a lower priority than Sea Spurge. Marram Grass identification and weeding is also slower, more laborious and difficult than sea spurge weeding. Marram Grass weeding involves spraying, wiping of individual leaves with herbicide or digging out entire clumps. In recent seasons, improved training in Marram Grass identification and the use of the monocotyledon specific herbicides has resulted in a significant increase in the rate of Marram Grass removal.

Stakeholders and Funding bodies:  The SPRATS program has been supported by theTasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service, WildCare, and in the early part of the project, the Australian  government’s Caring for Country program.

Contact information: Jon Marsden-Smedley, SPRATS (M) 0456 992 201 (E) jon.marsdensmedley@gmail.com  / sprats.tas@gmail.com

Shorebird habitat restoration in the Hunter Wetlands National Park

By Tom Clarke

Figure 1. Contractors felling mangrove trees to restore migratory shorebird habitat structure at Stockton Sandspit.

Introduction. Thirty-seven species of migratory shorebirds regularly visit Australia, with all but one spending up to 6 months of each year here. Globally, populations of some migratory shorebirds have declined by 80% over the last 30 years largely due to habitat destruction and disturbance along the East Asian-Australasian Flyway. Within Australia, degradation of feeding and roosting habitats and disturbance are the major threats. Shorebirds need access to safe roosting places. Typically, a favoured roost is close to feeding areas, has a wide-open space and a clear view of the water. A clear view is needed for predator avoidance. A major issue for shorebirds in the Hunter Estuary, indeed for the entire flyway, is having access to several roosts so that alternative sites are available when conditions and levels of disturbance become intolerable at the preferred roost.

In the late 1990s it became obvious that vegetation encroachment was degrading major roost sites in the Hunter Estuary. Of particular concern was the viability of Stockton Sandspit, a shorebird roost site of national importance. Mangrove encroachment along the beachfront was creating a wall of vegetation and effectively blocking the view of the water. Woody weeds were also encroaching on the roost area resulting in a large decline in shorebird numbers using the roost site.

Mangrove encroachment has been documented in several estuaries along the east coast of Australia. Halting encroachment is not an option but managing specific areas that are important for shorebirds is achievable. This project involves the removal of mangroves adjacent to favoured roosting sites to maintain low, open spaces with a clear view of the water, with the intent of maintaining the sites  for shorebirds as long as they keep turning up. The potential recovery of coastal saltmarsh in these sites is an added bonus as saltmarsh is an endangered ecological community.

Figure 2.  Main shorebird habitat restoration sites in Hunter Wetlands National Park.

Works undertaken. Mangroves are normally protected vegetation by law. After it was agreed by various stakeholders that mangroves should be cleared from Stockton Sandspit, a permit to remove mangroves was applied for from Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries). The initial permit allowed for the removal of mature mangroves from an area of less than 1 hectare. This primary work was carried out by contractors (Fig. 1). The funding agreement required matching volunteer effort. Initially, volunteer work involved Hunter Bird Observer’s Club (HBOC) monitoring the shorebirds, but this was quickly augmented by on-ground work to remove woody weeds (including Lantana Lantana camara, Bitou Bush Chysanthemoides monilifera ssp. rotundata and Telegraph Weed Heterotheca grandiflora) and reduce the density of native shrubs (including Acacia spp, Banksia spp. and Leptospermum spp.) from the roost area. Weeding also aimed to remove exotic rushes from a small area of saltmarsh. Following initial success, other shorebird roost sites in the Hunter Estuary with similar threats were added to the program (Fig. 2). These additional areas were selected using data from the shorebird monitoring being conducted by HBOC. At each site, an initial primary effort by contractors is followed up by HBOC volunteers and others. The project has been running continuously since 2002 and represents the HBOC commitment to caring for these endangered birds.

Over 10,900 volunteer hours has been accrued to date through the efforts of over 480 persons and the program is ongoing. Today, the project maintains nearly 150 hectares of shorebird habitat in Hunter Wetlands National Park. From March through to July each year, a program of works is scheduled to take advantage of favourable tides to access work areas. These cooler months are better for working in exposed areas and are when the population of migratory shorebirds is at its lowest. Removal of mangrove seedlings takes up most of the ongoing volunteer effort (Figs 3-6). The level of recruitment of mangrove seedlings varies from year to year and site to site. Factors such as tide height, wind direction and flood levels at the time of seed-drop affect the distribution of the seeds. Seed-drop usually occurs from the end of August through to early November with the majority falling through September. However, over the eighteen months of wet weather following the prolonged drought that ended in early 2020, mangrove seeds were washing up every month of the year. This required a massive effort to clear mangrove seedlings from all the sites in 2022. Thankfully the effort required in 2023 was back at a sustainable level.

Figure 3. Intrepid Landcarers cutting mangroves on Smith Island. (Photo T. Clarke)

Figure 4. Volunteers sweeping the marshes at Stockton Sandspit. (Photo T. Clarke)

Results to date. Removal of fringing mangroves and woody weeds from the roost area had an immediate positive effect. Most of the shorebirds quickly re-occupied Stockton Sandspit. This continues to be the case with Stockton Sandspit being one of the main daytime roosts used in the Hunter Estuary. Similar success has occurred at other sites but has not been quite as outstanding. These sites tend to be used by smaller aggregations of birds but are complementary to the Stockton Sandspit as different shorebird species prefer them. Some of the additional sites are frequently used as back-up roost sites when the preferred site is suffering unusually high levels of disturbance, often due to human activity.

Figure 5. Final sweeps over Milham Pond by Hunter Bird Observers Club volunteers in 2022. (Photo T. Clarke)

Figure 6. Mass drop of mangrove seeds happens every year at Stockton Sandspit and other places. Six months later the surviving seedlings are removed by volunteers. (Photo T. Clarke)

Lessons learned and future directions. Working on the inter-tidal areas has required that we develop an understanding of how the estuary system operates. In the early years lots of tide notes were collected for each site as well as shorebird movements. Utilising favourable tides gives better access and improves efficiency. Understanding certain shorebird behaviours also improves our efficiency. Quite often, a couple of forward scouts in the form of godwit or curlew will fly over a roost site on an inspection loop prior to the main rush of the various flocks. This is the signal for workers that it is time to vacate the site.

Many techniques and a variety of hand tools have been trialled with differing levels of success. Hand-pulling the seedlings has proven to be the most efficient. We have found that it is possible to manage the mangroves without the use of chemicals. Cutting stems lower than the next high tide results in the stumps being immersed and the tree dies. This also works for seedlings that are snapped-off. In situations where the substrate is firm enough, seedlings can be snapped off at ground level using a hoe. However, this method doesn’t work in soft mud as the plant bends away rather than breaking. Where seedling recruitment is dense, a battery-powered brush cutter has been utilised. This method was very useful during the year of continuous seeding.

While the initial work was motivated by a sense of obligation to intervene, the ongoing work provides positive feedback that maintains the energy and brings much satisfaction to the carers. This happens on every occasion that we witness the arrival of the shorebirds to the places that are restored each year, a positive joy. Maintenance of the various roost sites has become a wonderful opportunity to introduce people to shorebirds.

Stakeholders and funding bodies. At each stage of the project an initial effort of primary works was carried out by contractors and funded through various Government programs including the Australian Government’s Caring for Our Country, Envirofund and Threatened Species Recovery Fund.   The following have supported the works in some manner over the last twenty years; Twitchathon, Bird Interest Group Network (BIGNet), Birdlife Australia,  Conservation Volunteers Australia, the NSW Departments of Primary Industries and Fisheries, and Planning and Environment (and their predecessors), Hunter Bird Observers Club, Hunter Catchment Management Authority, Hunter Local Land Services, Hunter Regional Landcare Network, Kooragang Wetlands Rehabilitation Project, NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service, Newcastle Kayak Tours, Newcastle City Council, Newcastle Coal Infrastructure Group, NSW Government, Toolijooa, Trees In Newcastle, University of Newcastle.

The volunteer effort has been led by members of HBOC that make up the core team. Additional contributions have been made from other groups from time to time including: Better Earth Teams, Green Army, International Student Volunteers, TAFE students, Koora Gang, Intrepid Landcare, Worimi Green Team, Stockton Scouts, Raymond Terrace Scouts, Al Gazzali and Rigpa Buddists.

Contact information. For more information contact Tom Clarke thomas.clarke7@bigpond.com and project reports can be viewed on the HBOC website Rehabilitation Projects – Hunter Bird Observers Club (hboc.org.au).

Rewilding lake edges at Sherwood Arboretum, Queensland

Carole Bristow

Figure 1. The site in 2014, 5 years prior to works, showing the lack of wetland fringing vegetation due to it being regularly brushcut. (Photo Friends of Sherwood Arboretum)

Sherwood Arboretum, 15 hectares in size, contains a collection of planted (specimen) Queensland native trees under the supervision of Brisbane Botanic Gardens. Located in the suburb of Sherwood in Brisbane, the Arboretum has the Brisbane River as its western boundary and there are three small watercourses running both into and out of two lakes, providing habitat for wildlife. Before the development of the Arboretum in 1925, the lakes were a single paperbark swamp with small patches of open water. An early city water main ran across the swamp roughly dividing it in two. In 1975 the water main was covered by rocks and soil to form a causeway/walking path, and the swamp was reshaped to form two open lakes containing three islands. Many species of birds use the lakes, the watercourses, and the Arboretum as a whole, gathering and dispersing according to season or changes in management.

Prior to the commencement of regeneration treatments the edges of the lake were relatively barren (Fig 1), kept in this condition by regular mowing and brushcutting which led to occasional collapses of the edges into the lake.  Close inspection found around 14 natives among the weeds being mowed and brushcut; so the idea came that perhaps the natives could be allowed to grow and protect the edge.  This would also form a natural plant community and potential faunal habitat. Twenty weed species were observed, including Signal Grass (Brachiaria decumbens), Green Panic (Megathyrsus maximus var. pubiglumis), Bahia Grass (Paspalum notatum), Slender Pigeon Grass (Setaria parviflora), Blue Couch (Digitaria didactyla), Blue Billy Goat Weed (Ageratum houstonianium), Creeping Indigo (Indigofera spicata).

Works undertaken. In 2019, agreement was reached to discontinue mowing to the edge and brushcutting, and to trial bush regeneration-style weed management along a manageable portion of the lake edge; that is, both sides of the causeway.  The work was carried out by two members of the Friends of Sherwood Arboretum bushcare group, a Habitat Brisbane bushcare group which is supported by Brisbane City Council.   The two volunteers worked on a weekly basis over 4 years, gradually removing weeds to release native plants.  The technique involved weed removal prior to weed seed shed while allowing natives to seed.  The objective was to reduce weed soil seed banks and recharge native soil seed banks over time.

Figure 2. The north-west corner of the causeway in 2021 showing high density natives, particularly Willow Primrose. (Photo Gordon King)

Results to date. As weed cover declined markedly, natives increasingly reappeared, dominating the site within two years.  At the peak of the site’s recovery, 34 native wetland herbaceous species had returned – many of these in high abundance in particular locations Figs 2-7).  These particularly included Tassle Sedge (Carex facsicularis), Emu Foot (Cullen tenax), Narrrow-leaved Indigo (Indigofera linifolia), Common Rush (Juncus usitatus), Willow Primrose (Ludwigia octovalvis), Slender Knotweed (Persicaria decipiens), Spotted Knotweed (Persicaria strigosa) and Poison Pratia (Lobelia concolor).

Water birds that also graze on land have been observed by the regeneration team to be increasingly using the lake edges – including Purple Swamphen (Porphyrio melanotus), Wood Duck (Chenonetta jubata) (Fig 6), Dusky Moorhen (Gallinula tenebrosa) and Intermediate Egret (Ardea intermedia).  The wetland plant insect life has also increased in the recovered areas.  As a result, the Chequered Swallowtail Butterfly (Papilio demoleus) (Fig. 7) is now seen among the Emu Foot, one of its host plants.

Figure 3. General view with White Eclipta (Eclipta prostrata), Slender Knotweed, Willow Primrose, Commelina (Commelina sp.) and Azolla (Azolla sp.) (Photo Gordon King)

Figure 4. Emu Foot. One of the natives tenaciously surviving even when there was a heavy weed presence. (Insets are of the characteristic five leaflets and the inflorescence.) (Photos Gordon King.)

Figure 5. Diversity of native species is high in some places – such as pictured here where Willow Primrose, Common Reed, White Eclipta, Binung (Christella dentata), Sprawling Bluebell (Wahlenbergia gracilis) and Emu Foot occur in close proximity. The waterlily is the introduced Mexican Waterlily (Nymphaea mexicana) and is controlled from time to time. (Photo Gordon King)

Figure 6. Wood Ducks foraging along the regenerating lake edges. (Photo Gordon King)

Figure 7. Insect life has increased including the Chequered Swallowtail butterfly for which Emu Foot is a host plant. (Photo Gordon King)

Changes over time. Composition has proven to be seasonally variable. At one point when the water had reduced to a very low level in the lake, muddy edges appeared, and Bacopa (Bacopa monniera.) emerged and flowered. A few days later there was rain and the water rose and covered the flowering plants – which are unlikely to return until muddy edges reappear. More recently, with heavy rains in February 2022, floodwaters covered all the banks to a depth of over 1m for several days.  Many species were severely affected, particularly Willow Primrose.  However a good recovery of all species is occurring.

A notable result of the work has been that the lake edges are no longer eroding and it is clear that valuable new habitat has been created.  These results provide more positive options for future management of the more extended lake edge should habitat restoration be undertaken in the future. It is an inspiring project to be involved in.

Acknowledgements: Brisbane Botanic Gardens and Brisbane City Council Habitat Brisbane program for agreeing to try this process. The Habitat Brisbane program also helped with occasional contractor support. Also thanks are extended to Gordon King, for his unflagging effort as fellow worker and for the use of his photographs.

Contact: Carole Bristow, bushcare leader, Friends of Sherwood Arboretum bristowc@bigpond.net.au

Holistic regenerative management on a grazing farm, Allendale, Boorowa is leading to more complex native pastures and increased biodiversity

David Marsh

Figure 1. David Marsh among native grasses that naturally regenerated at Allendale (Photo T. McDonald).

Introduction:  When we purchased the 814 ha ‘Allendale” property in the wheat-sheep belt of the Southwest Slopes of NSW in 1966, almost all of the plants that had evolved here over millennia had disappeared although Europeans had only been here for 142 years. All that remained of the woody components were some scattered Yellow Box (Eucalyptus melliodora), Blakeley’s Red Gum (E. blakelyi) , a few White Box (E. albens), a few Apple Box (E. bridgesiana), and very few Hickory Wattle (Acacia implexa). The ground layer, which normally includes most of the biodiversity in grassy woodlands had almost completely disappeared.

During first 18 years (of the 52 years) managing our farm we took a conventional approach to farming, having a largely economic relationship with the land and applying all the latest agronomy to lift yields. In 1989 we began a shift towards a process of ‘recovery grazing’ using Alan Savory’s  Holistic Resource Management approach. This was motivated not only by our values of wanting to leave the local landscape in healthy condition but also by the fact that the conventional mixed farming model was driving our farm  into incrementally increasing debt. We realized that we were attempting to run a fixed enterprises in a variable climate of recurring drought and that wasn’t working.  Training in holistic management with a certified educator in 1999 gave me the confidence to take the process more seriously, as did my enrollment in a Grad Dip. of Sustainable Agriculture followed by a Masters degree in Sustainable Agriculture.

The basis of recovery grazing is to avoid preferential and repeated overgrazing of desirable perennials by using rotational grazing in many small paddocks (to avoid repeatedly grazing recovering plants) rather than set grazing in a few paddocks. This allows longer recovery times for the desirable native perennial grasses and avoids creating conditions best suited to annuals of less value to livestock.  The ecological and economic results of our efforts have been outstandingly positive.

Works undertaken: Our first objective was to get costs under control. Surprisingly, for us this meant discontinuing cropping. Despite intermittent large profits from cropping our analysis showed that it was not profitable overall due to the number of dry years, wet harvests and frosts. We also started managing livestock differently. We created more land divisions using conventional or electrical fencing and, in our case, piping water to each paddock rather than radiating paddocks around the dams. (A trial of the latter showed it would cause too much erosion over time.) The troughs, energiser and solar panels are moved with the cattle, each move taking less than an hour.  Fencing and water cost us $85/ha at the time and was completed in 5 years, which compared favourably to spending $70K a year on fertilisers and pesticides during our cropping phase.  Instead of 12 mobs of cattle and 26 paddocks we now have 104 paddocks (and usually one mob of cattle), running them on an agistment basis that happens to suit us. Each paddock is only grazed for a total of about 10 days per year which gives time for not only existing pasture species to recover but for new species to recruit.

Most of our vegetation restoration approach relies on natural regeneration including both groundcovers and trees.  But we have planted quite a few scattered trees and have also sown some native grass seed – either hand broadcasting after collecting it from roadsides (or where it has recovered on the property) or after mechanized seeding of purchased batches from other farmers interested in the same process.  Cattle are also agents in seed dispersal as they spread it when grazing plants with ripe seed. A technique that we have used occasionally is to intentionally move the mob from a paddock with ripe seed (after they have had a big feed)  to a paddock that doesn’t have much of the species we wish to encourage. Effectively the cattle are harvesting and sowing the seed for us at no cost.

Figure 2. Increase in native grass presence at Allendale over time. (1999 -2020)

Results to date:

Woody vegetation. Tree cover on Allendale has increased from 3% cover in 1966, to over 20% in 2022 (through both tree planting and natural recruitment). Since 2010 – when it rained after a nine-year dry spell – the big remnant trees began to reproduce. The long recoveries from grazing allowed around 800 saplings (with temporary electric tape to protect them from being grazed for a few years), to survive and become trees. This is the first time any native trees have germinated and survived on Allendale in over 100 years.  Wattles (Acacia spp.) were originally direct seeded and are now recruiting.  This increase in woody vegetation and cycling provides the basis for a far more complex ecosystem on Allendale (with more insects, small reptiles, birds and a range of mammals) compared to recent previous decades.

Bird life. With these changes, a whole lot of other ecological shifts are also occurring at no cost. These days there are many thousands of quail (Coturnix sp.), finches (Neochmia spp.) and wrens (Malurus spp.) are present in increasing numbers. Dusky Wood Swallow (Artamus cyanopterus cyanopterus) and White-browed Wood Swallow (Artamus superciliosus ) come nearly every year and breed here; the Rufous Songlark (Cincloramphus mathewsi ), a ground nesting bird that we seldom saw previously, is now frequently observed. Various raptors are constantly here; the Black Shouldered Kite (Elanus axillaris), Nankeen Kestrel (Falco cenchroides), Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aquila audax), Brown Falcon (Falco berigora), Swamp Harrier (Circus approximans), Spotted Harrier (Circus assimilis) and Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) are frequent visitors. To date there have been 128 species of birds identified on the property, and we have observed informally that many of these species (and their abundance) have increased in recent years.

Grasses. Cibolabs analyses have shown that our ground cover levels have been at 100% for many years now and there have been particular increases in native grasses (Fig. 1).  We mapped the native grasses on the property in 1999 and found them present in only 1 ha out of 814 ha and confined to rocky outcrops that could not be ploughed and in a few fence corners. Repeat mapping in 2004/5 showed native grasses covered a larger area (~86ha) – with further increases mapped in 2010 (189ha) and 2020 (440ha) (Figs 2-5).  Indeed, representatives of the warm season perennials that evolved here can now be found in most if not all our paddocks even though too scattered to map.

The grass species include wallaby grasses (Rytidosperma spp.), Common Wheat Grass (Elymus scaber), spear and corkscrew grasses (Austrostipa spp.), Umbrella Grass (Chloris truncata), Kangaroo Grass, (Themeda triandra), Weeping Grass (Microlaena stipoides), Box Grass (Paspalidium distans), Arm Grass (Brachiaria milliformis), Queensland Blue Grass, (Dicanthium sericeum), Red Grass, (Bothriocloa macra), Cotton Panic (Digitaria brownii) and Wild Sorghum (Sorghum leiocladum). All these species have increased markedly in recent years, with the big stand-outs being Arm Grass, Box Grass, the wallaby grasses and Umbrella Grass (See Appendix 1).

While we believe the grasses would have gradually increased over time without sowing, we have accelerated the process by sowing some species in small quantities using a disc seeder in some sites, but mainly broadcasting seed by hand from a quad bike (Figs. 3 and 4 0a.nd Appendix 1).  Seeds were also dispersed by the cattle.

Figure 3. Locations of seed sowing treatments over time at Allendale.

Figure 4 Locations of seed sowing treatments over time at Allendale.

Figure 5. Native grass presence in all Allendale paddocks (with and without sowing) by 2020

Non-natives.  Achieving change has been more difficult in the paddocks where we had previously introduced exotic seed mixes including Cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata) and Phalaris (Phalaris aquatica). These two perennial exotic grasses are highly dominant and can temporarily competitively exclude native grasses (even if the latter may still be present) –  particularly in wet seasons.  Experience suggests that this may  explain why native grass sowings in recent high rainfall years have not yet shown results (Figs 4-5).  These species are still valuable for grazing, however, as is Paspalum (Paspalum dilatatum) – which has increased – and Plantain/Ribwort (Plantago lanceolata) which is considered beneficial to the quality of the pasture.

In general, however, managing ground cover to reduce bare ground has helped managed disturbance-adapted invasive weeds such as Illyrian Thistle (Onopordum illyricum), Patterson’s Curse (Echium plantagineum), Capeweed (Arctotheca calendula) and Amsinckia (Amsinckia spp.); all of which now occur only occasionally. Importantly, we previously had an annual spraying program for some of the problematic annuals but we have not done that for 22 years;  managing ground cover to reduce bare ground goes a very long way to manage the populations of disturbance-adapted species. Any small patches of high-risk weeds (e.g. Rubus sp. and Rosa sp.) have proven manageable by mattocking out.

Lessons learned: Our goal is to live in a landscape increasing in biodiversity and to meet our economic goals. Over 30 years we were expending large amounts of money on contractors while rolling the dice against the weather, with little time for holidays.  We have found that we now usually have perennial native grasses dominating in summer and that this avoids the previous boom and bust cycle. The recovery grazing management (probably combined with reduced nutrient loads) has now resulted in more diverse native perennial pastures and avoids the cost of resowing. This allows time for habitat to develop to increase native fauna and allows us to produce time for recreation.

The benefits we have seen however, required a changed mindset.  It is quite hard for farmers to avoid intervening.  We had lots of weeds for many years because our previous management had pushed succession all over the farm back to an early state due to the creation of bare ground, even though we had sown perennials. A more mature succession took 3-5 years after ceasing sowing, weed control and overgrazing, so it did not occur overnight.  Importantly, all this required quite a philosophic conversion. Quite a lot of the farmers going down this track show a shift in attitude, characterized by patience and a greater willingness to take responsibility for land outcomes.  Such a changed mindset is not yet being entertained by the number of farmers needed to stop the slow but inexorable decline of biodiversity on farmland.   Yet more farmers are thinking about it now compared to in the last 20 years, which is an encouraging sign.

Acknowledgements: Thanks goes to my family (Mary Marsh, Skye Rush, Hugh Marsh and Alice Needham) and to my farming colleagues that have also been going on this journey (Charles Massy, Colin Seis, Martin Royds and Scott Hickman) .

Contact: David Marsh, Allendale, Boorowa NSW, Australia. Email: marsh.allendale1@gmail.com

Appendix 1. The main grass species, treatments and results at Allendale over approximately two decades.

Species Intervention Results
Wallaby grasses (Rytidosperma spp.) Very little seed has been scattered of one variety only Six varieties are now present and appeared within 3-5 years. All are spreading.
Box grass

(Paspalidum distans )

Included in the total of  ~8×40 kg bags of seed purchased from another farmer, Colin Seis, over the years) and hand dribbled in rows about 20m apart from the quad bike.  Also included in the ‘Seis mix’ disc-seeded into paddocks totalling 150ha. In 1999 only found in one or two small patches but now it is every across the property
Umbrella Grass

(Chloris truncata)

Included in the above-described ‘Seis mix’ hand dribbled and disc-seeded Was present in 1999 but now it is widespread as the seed heads are like umbrellas and tumble
Arm Grass  – Brachiaria milliformis Included in the above-described ‘Seis mix’ hand dribbled and disc-seeded Was absent when first came here.  Now it is widespread and increasing all the time.

 

Kangaroo grass – (Themeda   triandra) A total of half a wool pack from nearby roadside has been dispersed by hand from a quad bike over the ~15 years (split over ~four occasions). Was absent when first came here but was present on the roadside. It is not spreading rapidly but is starting to come back.

 

Corkscrew and tall Stipa

(Austrostipa spp.)

 

Pre-existed and not collected. Some was present in uncropped areas. As a pioneer it can now be seasonally abundant.
Red grass (Bothriochloa macra) A little pre-existed was original present  but some is in the ‘Seis mix’ hand dribbled and disc-seeded Some was present in uncropped areas. It is now increasing although quite slowly.
Weeping grass (Microlaena stipoides) Some seed was included in grass culms harvested from a nearby property and ‘blown’ out onto some Allendale paddocks by Owen Whittaker. Some was present in uncropped areas.  It is gradually increasing.
Common Wheat Grass (Elymus scaber)

 

No seed was sown but have collected from Allendale paddocks and distributed by hand a from quad bike. Some was present in 1999 but it is now spreading extensively. The species is relatively insignificant but has a place in a pasture.

 

Lake Bolac Eel Festival and Environmental Forum – 25-26 March 2022

Figure 1. An Environmental Forum is a held at each Lake Bolac Eel Festival to bring to the festival-goers reliable information about the ecology of the region and its potential for improved management. (Photo Tein McDonald)

Introduction. Cultural events are increasingly recognised as critical to cultural change and community awareness building. One outstanding example is the Lake Bolac Eel Festival (Kuyang Lapakira – Plenty Eels), a biennial festival held at Lake Bolac in the western basalt plains of Victoria to celebrate environmental repair and Aboriginal cultural revival (Figs 1-5).

The timing of the festival reflects the season when Kuyang (Shortfinned Eel, Anguilla australis) begins its migration to the sea to spawn and when the First Nations Communities from surrounding areas gathered to harvest the species, trade and hold ceremonies. As such the festival is a significant gathering place for people who care for the environment and respect Aboriginal cultural heritage, promoting the restoration of Lake Bolac and surrounding waterways.

Figure 2. The 2022 Eel Festival’s Welcome to Country was conducted by Traditional Owner Brett Clarke with the assistance of local Indigenous community members. The Festival is a gathering of new generations of people affirming the traditions of past generations who cared for the lands and waters of the Lake Bolac area. (Photo Ayesha Burdett)

Figure 3. The festival is very small but is attended by many locals and those serious about ecological and cultural restoration. In 2022, workshops on topics including tanning Eel leather, Indigenous tools and song-making, and childrens’ craft activities were interspersed among music and dance events. (Photo Tein McDonald)

An Environmental Forum is a regular part of each festival program. At this year’s forum, chaired by freshwater wetland ecologist Michelle Casanova, six presenters including Traditional Owners, Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Management Authority representatives, the local Landcare group, local landholders and researchers provided rich information about the significance of the site, the eel and its habitat,  management strategies, and roles of stakeholders.

The Forum commenced with a moving Welcome dance and a smoking ceremony led by Traditional Owner Brett Clarke. The first speakers were Tim Hill and Jileena Cole, Chair and Facilitator respectively from the Beyond Bolac Catchment Action Group, who described the context of the efforts to protect and repair eel habitats in a production landscape. Brett Clarke then spoke movingly on the role of First Nations people caring for Country and culture. The third speaker was Greg Kerr, Senior Ecologist with Nature Glenelg Trust, who focused on exploring the idea of ‘home’ for animals in Lake Bolac, while the fourth speaker, John Sherwood from Deakin University, intrigued the audience with his presentation on recent evidence of the Moyjil archaeological site at Warrnambool Victoria that suggests far earlier habitation of Victoria by Aboriginal people than is conventionally understood.

Damein Bell – member of the Gundtijmara community, CEO of Gunditj Mirring Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation and currently a Board Member with the Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Management Authority – spoke engagingly on the long effort to have the Budj Bim Cultural Landscape recognised on the UNESCO World Heritage List in July 2019. This account reinforced the importance of patient and persistent action to effect social change.

Perhaps the most intriguing talk was the presentation by the sixth speaker, Wayne Koster from the Arthur Rylah Institute (DELWP) who regaled us with what is currently known about the migration of the Short-finned Eel. This species is native to the lakes, dams and coastal rivers of south-eastern Australia, New Zealand, and much of the South Pacific, but very little has been historically known about its reproduction or where this takes place. Preliminary results were presented of Waynes’s recent work satellite tracking oceanic migrations of the Short-finned Eel, with migration track to the Coral Sea between New Caledonia and Australia.

Figure 4. The large tent provides the setting for both the Environmental Forum and the later musical events. (Photo Tein McDonald)

Figure 5. The day’s activities culminated in a Twilight ceremony featuring Aboriginal dancers, followed by a concert headlined by local musician and one of the Festival founders, Neil Murray. ( Photo Una Allender).

Stakeholders: The event is managed by the Lake Bolac Eel Festival Committee. Funders include: Grampians Pyrenees Primary Care Partnership, Victorian Regional Arts Fund Community Grants Round 2 2019, Ararat Rural City Council; Regional Arts Victoria, Beyond Bolac Catchment Action Groups, Stronger Communities Programme Round 7 – Wannon, Visit Victoria – Regional Community Events Fund, Glenelg Hopkins CMA, Willaura Lake Bolac Community Bank and NBN Local.

Contacts: Una Allender <uallender@bigpond.com> or Ayesha Burdett <ayesha.burdett@gmail.com> Lake Bolac Eel Festival Committee.  Media contact: Sally Gibson <sgibsonaustralia@gmail.com>

Highly resilient response at a Cooma restoration site points to native plant adaptation to drought and short growing seasons

Tein McDonald

Figure 1. One of the many ‘before and after’ photo pairs showing how, (a) at the start of the project in 2019, a near-monoculture of African Love Grass was persisting even during the drought – but (b) native regeneration boomed after two seasons of good rain and regular spot-spraying of the prolific and diverse weed that regenerated along with the natives.

Introduction. Assisted regeneration works have been undertaken over three seasons at a small (4ha) but uncleared privately owned bush block on the urban boundary of Cooma in the southern tablelands of NSW. Degradation at the start of the project in 2019 reflected past land uses. Flatter areas disturbed by historic light sheep grazing and vehicular tracks appeared in poor condition, with infestations of serious weed, particularly bird spread shrubs and pasture weeds. Drought-induced dieback occurred across the site, along with evidence of overgrazing by macropods and rabbits. Most of the site’s extensive (lichen and moss-covered) granite rocky knolls, however, remained undisturbed and in good condition.

Results of the works were expected to be gradual, given that the area’s annual average rainfall was around 538 mm and growing seasons short due to the southern tablelands’ relatively cold climate. While these lower expectations were reasonable, they did not factor in the above average rainfall of the 2021-21 season and, particularly, the very high and evenly distributed rainfall of the 2021-22 growing season.

Vegetation community. The main vegetation association on the site (and the Reserve) is Ribbon Gum (Eucalyptus viminalis)-E Black Cypress Pine (Callitris endlicheri) grassy woodland, with co-dominant trees including Candlebark (E. rubida), Apple Box (E. bridgesiana), Broad-leaved Peppermint (E. dives) and Mountain Gum (E. dalympleana). Sweet Bursaria (Bursaria spinosa), Red-stemmed Wattle (Acacia rubida) and Woolly Grevillea (Grevillea lanigera) are common in the mid-storey, along with six Fabaceae shrubs. Out of the 88 native vascular plant species, 63 are herbaceous (15 grass species and 48 forb species including 13 Asteraceae) species.

Weeds. At least 40 weed species occur on site, falling into two groupings – shrubs and groundcovers. The most prevalent shrubs were Orange Firethorn (Pyrocantha spp.) and Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster spp.) The most prevalent groundcovers were African Love Grass (Eragrostis curvula), Yellow Catsear (Hypochaeris radicata), Smooth Catsear (Hypochaeris glabra), St Johns Wort (Hypericum perforatum), Hare’s Foot Clover (Trifolium arvense), Proliferous pink (Petrorhagia nanteuilii) and Fleabane (Conyza sp.).

Works undertaken. Works have focused on the systematic and careful spot-spraying of individual weeds, rigorously following up to avoid the weed recharging soil seed banks. Cut brush was also laid down in a brickwork pattern along the contours to retain waterflow (where erosion was an issue) or deter macropods (where overgrazing was an issue, see https://youtu.be/4hmLFSL_kHQ ).

At the commencement of the works, ‘before’ photos were taken from eight pegged photopoints and at least 10 other informal ‘before’ shots across a wider range of subsites. Condition class mapping was undertaken using a 5-scale system adapted from the system used by the NSW National Trust since the 1980s.

Figure 3. (a) Before and (b) after treatment at the ‘Rabbit flat’ subsite. This area was highly drought affected and overgrazed by kangaroos and rabbits in 2019. Weed trimmings were laid on the site to reduce sheet erosion and grazing. Weeds were regularly controlled, particularly African Love Grass and Hare’s Foot Clover. Drought breaking rains triggered germination of mainly Golden Everlasting (Chrysocephalum apiculatum), New Holland Daisy (Vittadinea cuneata) and range of other natives. Very little African Love Grass and other weeds now persist at this site.

Weed treatments (totalling approx. 250 hours) were carried out over three growing seasons (Spring- Autumn) starting in December 2019 and extending till May 2022 (Table 1). By far the most hours (237) were directed to precision knapsack spot-spraying of groundcover weeds, with relatively few hours treating shrub weeds. The highest input was required in the third season, due to its exceptionally favourable rainfall (Fig. 2) when we needed to increase our inputs to treat all herbaceous weed across the whole site prior to their setting seed and recharging seed banks.

Table 1.  Hours involved in spot-spraying of groundcover weed for each of the three seasons.

Season 1  (2019-20) Season 2(2020-21) Season 3(2019-20)
77 56

Figure 2. Rainfall records at the site over three growing seasons from December 2019 to May 2022 (Blue bars is rainfall recorded at East St, Cooma; the red line the mean rainfall recorded at the Cooma Visitor’s Centre).

Results to date. While the site is far from fully recovered and works will be ongoing, results to date are encouraging. Figures 1 and 3 are three of many before and after photo pairs that compare the condition of all subsites prior to work with native plant recovery by January 2022 –24 months after the first drought-breaking rains. (Also see multiple photos at https://youtu.be/wjNviPl-MqY .) The condition classifications prior to works and at 3 seasons after works are shown in Figure 4.

In general most sites appear to have moved up in condition by at least one class; there is now substantially more area of medium to high condition after treatment compared to prior to treatment. However this result is still somewhat uncertain as the degree to which some of the Hare’s-foot Clover may have matured prior to spraying is unclear. The test of condition will be in Spring during the next above-average rainfall year.

Figure 4. Condition mapping (a) before and (b) after 3 seasons using a five-level condition classification system. The two maps show an increase in area of the green end of the spectrum (higher condition) and a reduction in area at the red end of the spectrum (lower condition). [The colour-coding and criteria are based on a four-level system used traditionally in the bush regeneration industry developed by the National Trust in the 1970s then modified during the 1990s by T. McDonald and subsequently resequenced to align with the 1-5 sequencing used in the 5-star system of the National Restoration Standards.]

Lessons learned and future directions.  The resilience level of this cold-climate, drought-affected plant community proved to be surprisingly high and growth relatively rapid after highly favourable rainfall. This may indeed be due to the species’ adaptation to periodic drought and short growing seasons.  Importantly (as elsewhere) such resilience also lends a capacity for natives to recover after periods of weed domination if that weed is removed.

It is logical to view the pattern of drought followed by highly favourable rainfall as somewhat similar to wildfire followed by highly favourable rainfall.  In such circumstances there is benefit in systematically treating as large an area as possible to (i) take advantage of the opportunities for rapid recovery of natives and (ii)  avoid massive and unusual recharge of weed seedbanks that could set a site’s condition back by many decades. While the landholders in this case did the work themselves and could increase or decrease work as required per season, cases relying on public funding would benefit from contingency funding being set aside for supporting additional restoration inputs in high rainfall seasons post-fire or post-drought.

Stakeholders.  The works were carried out by the block’s landholders Tein McDonald and Graeme Little.   Friends of Grassland helped with plant identification and encouragement and provided a small grant  to offset the costs of herbicide and equipment.

Contact:  Tein McDonald teinm@ozemail.com.au

Regeneration of indigenous vegetation at Third Reedy Lake as it has dried over summer and autumn 2022

Damien Cook

Introduction.  Third Reedy Lake is a freshwater wetland in the Kerang region in north central Victoria. It is part of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site, which means that it is recognised as being of international significance for wetland conservation as it supports threatened plant and animal species and ecological communities and rookeries of colonial nesting wetland birds.

Prior to European occupation this wetland, along with Middle Lake and Reedy Lake, would have been inundated only when floodwaters came down the Loddon River and caused the intermittent Wandella and Sheep Wash Creeks to flow. At that time the wetland experienced a natural wetting and drying cycle, filling up from floodwaters and drying out completely between floods, which occurred on average once every 3 to 4 years.

In the 1920s, however, this natural wetting and drying cycle was discontinued. Third Reedy Lake became part of the Torrumbarry Irrigation Scheme. Water was diverted out of the Murray River at Torrumbarry Weir and made to flow through a series of natural wetlands including Kow Swamp, the Reedy Lakes, Little Lake Charm and Kangaroo Lake to deliver water to irrigate farms. The lakes and swamps became permanently inundated.  While this meant farmers had a reliable supply of water it also profoundly altered the ecology of the wetlands (Fi. 1).

Figure 1. Third Reedy Lake in February 2013 prior to being bypassed. Continuous inundation for around a century had drowned the native vegetation, leaving only skeletons of trees. (Photo D. Cook)

Trees such as River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and Black Box (E. largiflorens) were drowned, lake bed plants that relied on a drying cycle could no longer grow and the ecological productivity of the wetlands was massively reduced. The density of wetland birds has been found to be positively correlated to wetland productivity and this metric has been used in a variety of ecological studies to compare the use of different habitats by wetland birds. During bird counts conducted in 2018 the highest density of birds on Third Reedy Lake was about 5 birds/hectare. In contrast the naturally intermittent Lake Bael Bael supported over 60 birds/hectare, a density 12 times higher. While Third Reedy Lake supported a maximum of 17 wetland bird species Lake Bael Bael supported a maximum 38 wetland bird species.

Works undertaken

Hydrological works.  Third Reedy Lake was deemed to be inefficient for moving water due to losses caused by evaporation and so it was intentionally bypassed by the irrigation scheme in 2020. The lake therefore dried for the first time in one hundred years over the summer of 2022. Environmental water will be periodically delivered to the wetland in the future to mimic its natural wetting and drying cycle and assist ecological recovery.

Revegetation works. Over 2000 River Red Gum trees and 1000  understorey plants, including Tangled Lignum (Duma florulenta) and Southern Cane-grass (Eragrostis infecunda), have been planted across the centre of the lake where no natural regeneration was likely to occur in the short to medium term. Members of the local Barapa Barapa and Wemba Wemba Traditional owner communities were employed to plant the trees and other plants (Fig. 2). The Barapa Barapa and Wemba Wemba Traditional Owners have a strong interest in the wetland because of its cultural values.


Figure 2. Uncle Trevor Kirby with a Red Gum he has just planted and guarded at Third Reedy Lake April 2022. . Virtually no native vegetation remained visible on the lake bed immediately after the long inundation. (Photo T. McDonald)

The River Red Gum seedlings have been planted next to dead River Red Gum stumps to replicate the original woodland structure of the wetland (Fig  3). Planting next to the stumps has other advantages; they provide shelter from the wind and sun and soil carbon and moisture levels are highest close to the rotting wood.

Figure 3. River Red Gum seedling planted next to an old red gum stump, Third Reedy Lake May 2022. (Photo D. Cook)

Results to date.  In the first 3 months without inundation the lakebed muds dried out, followed by deep cracking (Fig 2). Planted trees thrived as there was still ample moisture in the sub-soil.  Site inspections in May 2022 revealed that substantial natural regeneration of the wetland has begun (Fig. 4).

After 100 years without drying it was not known if any seed bank of the original lakebed vegetation would have survived. However, 46 native species have been recorded growing on the lakebed since the last of the water evaporated from the lake in April 2022. This includes two threatened species: Floodplain Groundsel (Senecio campylocarpus) and Applebush (Pterocaulon sphacelatum) (Fig. 5) . The germination of Applebush is particularly surprising given that this is only the fourth record of this plant in Victoria, the species being more common in the arid centre of Australia. Other indigenous species that have regenerated on the lakebed are shown in Figs 6 and 7.

Figure 4. Lake bed herbs regenerating after the drying phase, at Third Reedy Lake, May 2022 . A total of 46 native species have been recorded as having regenerated on the lakebed since the last of the water evaporated from the lake in April 2020 (Photo D. Cook)

Figure 5. Among the 46 native species regenerating is Applebush (Pterocaulon sphacelatum) which is particularly surprising as it is listed as endangered in Victoria and known to occur in only three other locations. (Photo Dylan Osler)

Figure 6. Spreading Nut-heads (Sphaeromorphaea littoralis), Third Reedy Lake May 2022. This species is uncommon in the Kerang region, the closest records to Third Reedy Lake being from the Avoca Marshes. (Photo D. Cook)

Figure 7. Golden Everlasting (Xerochrysum bracteatum) and Bluerod (Stemodia florulenta) make an attractive display of wildflowers. These species are uncommon at present but if weeds are controlled adequately, they should recolonise much of the wetland floor. (Photo D. Cook)

River Red Gum regeneration has been localised on the bed of the lake and has mainly occurred on the fringes close to where living Red Gum trees have shed seed. The densest Red Gum regeneration has occurred on a sandy rise close to the inlet of the lake, where the trees have grown rapidly (Figs 8 and 9). Many of the seedlings that have germinated on the edge of the lakebed are being heavily grazed by rabbits or wallabies.

Figure 8. Regenerating Red Gums and native grasses and sedges on a sandy rise near the inlet of Third Reedy Lake, May 2022.(Photo D. Cook)

Figure 9. River Red Gum seedling on cracking clay soil that has germinated near the lake edge. Many of these seedlings are being heavily grazed, probably by rabbits or wallabies. (Photo D. Cook)

The young trees will take many years to develop the hollows required by many species of wildlife, but hopefully the old stumps will persist for some time to provide this important habitat feature (Fig 10). When these trees grow large enough, they will provide shady nesting sites for colonial nesting wetland birds such as Australasian Darter (Anhinga novaehollandiae) (Fig. 10) and Great Cormorant  (Phalacrocorax carbo) and replace the dead standing trees as they rot and fall over.

Figure 10. Australasian Darter chicks on a nest in a live River Red Gum in the creek that joins Middle Lake to Third Reedy Lake. (Photo D. Cook)

Stakeholders: Barapa Barapa, Wemba Wemba, Goulburn-Murray Water, North Central Catchment Management Authority and Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site Committee

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