department of health march 2015 tree health monitoring · annual monitoring will be undertaken in...

Department of Health

March 2015 Tree Health Monitoring

Busselton Health Campus

April 2015

This page has been left intentionally blank.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd ABN: 65 140 765 902

i

March 2015 Tree Health Monitoring

Prepared for Department of Health

Prepared by Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd Suite 2, 53 Burswood Road Burswood WA 6100 Australia

PO Box 4223 Victoria Park WA 6979 Australia

t +61 8 9269 6200 f +61 8 9269 6299 coffey.com

ABN: 65 140 765 902

April 2015

ENAUPERT04326AB_007_v1

Library Reference: EP2015/037

Quality Information

Revision History

Revision Description Date Originator Reviewer Approver

V1 draft Draft 10/04/2015 L. Dadour C. van den Bergh D. True

Distribution

Report Status No. of copies Format Distributed to Date

V1 draft 1 PDF Department of Health 10/04/2015

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd ABN: 65 140 765 902

ii


Busselton Health Campus | March 2015 Tree Health Monitoring

Coffey ENAUPERT04326AB_007_v1 April 2015

iii

Contents

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1

2 Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 On-ground tree health survey ............................................................................................. 3

2.2 Remote sensing (aerial) tree health survey ........................................................................ 3

3 Results ......................................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Climate ................................................................................................................................ 7

3.2 Vigour ................................................................................................................................. 8

3.3 Crown density and foliage transparency ............................................................................ 8

3.4 Crown dieback .................................................................................................................... 9

3.5 General tree observations ................................................................................................ 10

3.5.1 Insect damage ..................................................................................................... 10

3.5.2 Pathogen presence .............................................................................................. 11

3.5.3 Epicormic growth ................................................................................................. 11

3.5.4 Tree death............................................................................................................ 12

3.5.5 Flowering/fruiting ................................................................................................. 12

3.5.6 Presence of Western Ringtail Possums and dreys ............................................. 13

3.6 Digital multi-spectral imagery ........................................................................................... 13

3.6.1 Change detection ................................................................................................. 13

4 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 15

5 Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 17

6 References ................................................................................................................................. 19

Figures

1 Survey and conservation area ...................................................................................................... 2 2 Transect and tagged tree location ................................................................................................ 5 3 Average long-term and 2014/2015 monthly rainfall totals from weather station

No. 009515 (BOM, 2015) .............................................................................................................. 7 4 Frequency of crown dieback categories from March 2011 to March 2015 ................................. 10 5 Number of tagged trees showing insect borer and termite activity ............................................. 11 6 Mean plant cell density over the five autumn survey periods ..................................................... 13



iv

Tables

1 Mean combined vigour class from autumn data (March 2011 to March 2015) ............................ 8 2 Mean vigour class of each transect, individual trees and combined data autumn tree health

assessments 2011–2015 .............................................................................................................. 8 3 Mean crown density and mean foliage transparency ................................................................... 9 4 Comparison of the average crown density (%) across the four transects, individual trees and

combined data of the tree health assessments for autumn surveys 2011–2015 ......................... 9 5 Summary of tree health state between spring monitoring periods ............................................. 15 6 Assessment of tree health against the spring trigger levels ....................................................... 16

Plates

1 Revegetated area ....................................................................................................................... 12 2 Conservation area ....................................................................................................................... 12 3 Peppermint trees near irrigated lawns ........................................................................................ 12

Appendices

A Tree health monitoring procedure (Coffey, 2013a). B Tree health data March 2015 survey C Monthly rainfall totals (January 2010 to February 2015) and mean monthly rainfall for weather station 009515 (BOM 2014) D Crown dieback E SpecTerra Services – March 2015 DMSI True Imagery F SpecTerra Services – March 2015 DMSI False Imagery G SpecTerra Services – Busselton Hospital Change Detection March 2014 to March 2015 H SpecTerra Services – Busselton Hospital Change Detection March 2011 to March 2015



1

1 Introduction

The Western Australian Department of Health (DoH) is currently building the new Busselton Health Campus on the existing Busselton Hospital site. The new Busselton Health Campus will cater for the projected demand for health services in the southwest region of Western Australian, associated with the projected population growth.

The Busselton Hospital site is 12.3 hectares (ha) in size, of which a large portion is open Peppermint (Agonis flexuosa) woodland, with relatively little understorey (Figure 1). The site is located within core habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum (WRP) (Pseudocheirus occidentalis), which is listed as a threatened species under both State (Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 (WC Act)) and Federal (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)) environmental legislation.

The preparation and implementation of a WRP Management Plan was a condition of approval for the Busselton Health Campus redevelopment under the EPBC Act (EPBC 2011/6011) and Environmental Protection Act 1986 (NVCP 4433/2). The WRP Management Plan (V9) was subsequently revised and approved by the then Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (now the Department of the Environment) and the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) (15/08/2013).

The approved WRP Management Plan (Coffey, 2013a) outlines the requirement for a tree health monitoring program to be conducted at the Busselton Health Campus, as detailed in Management Measure 15 (M15):

‘Monitor tree health twice a year during construction and for no less than two years post-construction using ground-based and remote sensing methods… Monitoring will then be undertaken once a year at 5 and 10 years post-construction. Twice yearly monitoring will be undertaken in approximately March and September of each year to allow comparison with previous monitoring results. Annual monitoring will be undertaken in approximately September.

A Tree Health Monitoring Procedure (Appendix A) was developed and approved as part of the WRP Management Plan. Coffey was commissioned in 2013 to undertake the tree health monitoring program (until 2017) and this report details the results of the March 2015 tree health assessment.

D ate:M XD :

Fi le N a m e :

34 4 ,0 0 0

34 4 ,0 0 0

34 4 ,1 0 0

34 4 ,1 0 0

34 4 ,2 0 0

34 4 ,2 0 0

34 4 ,3 0 0

34 4 ,3 0 0

6,274

,700

6,274

,700

6,274

,800

6,274

,800

6,274

,900

6,274

,900

6,275

,000

6,275

,000

6,275

,100

6,275

,100

6,275

,200

6,275

,200

F ig u re N o :

So urceR ed e velop m e n t a re a fro m N atur al A r ea C on sulta n ts (Ju ne 2 0 1 3)R oa d n a m es f ro m L an d ga te .Ae ria l im a g ery fro m S pe c te rra (M a rch 2 01 5 ).

1S u r v e y a n d c o n s e rv a tio n a re aM ar ch 2 0 15 T re e H e a lth M o n ito r in gB u s se l to n H e a lth C a m p u s

D ep ar tm e n t o f H e a l th

4 3 2 6 A B _ 0 0 7 _ F 0 0 1 _ G IS4 3 2 6 A B _ 0 0 7 _ G IS 0 0 1 _ v 0 _ 13 1 . 0 3 . 2 0 1 5

B u s s e ll H ig h w a y

M ill Ro ad

Craig S tre e t

D R A F T

LE G E N DSite bo und aryC on se rva tion a rea

BUSSE LL H IG HW AY

SUES

RO A

D

CAVE

S R O

A D VA S S E H IG H W AY

C A P EL

N A N N U P

BU S SE LT O ND O N N Y B R O O K

D U N S B O R O U G H

M AR G A R E T R IVE R

N

Page s ize: A4

0 6 0m

Pro je ct io n: G D A 199 4 M G A Z one 50

Scale 1:2 ,500



3

2 Methods

The methodology employed for the March 2015 tree health assessment was consistent with surveys completed by Coffey to date (September 2010 to October 2015) (Coffey, 2011a; 2011b; 2012a; 2012b; 2013b; 2013c; 2014a; 2014b) and in accordance with the current Busselton Health Campus Tree Health Monitoring Procedure (Appendix A).

The tree health assessment was undertaken in two stages, including an on-ground tree health survey and a remote sensing (aerial) tree health survey.

2.1 On-ground tree health survey

The on-ground tree health survey was conducted on 11 March 2015. The on-ground tree health survey was undertaken by a qualified botanist from Coffey in conjunction with the WRP monitoring survey.

Two hundred and eighty seven (287) Peppermint trees, two Melaleucas and one Eucalypt tree were tagged during the baseline surveys in September 2010 and March 2011.The on-ground tree health survey involves the visual assessment of these 290 tagged trees (Figure 2) in accordance with the Tree Health Monitoring Procedure provided as Appendix A. The March 2015 Tree Health Survey involved the visual assessment of 227 Peppermint trees, two Melaleucas and one Eucalypt tree, due to the approved removal of Peppermint trees since 2013.

2.2 Remote sensing (aerial) tree health survey

The remote sensing (aerial) tree health survey was conducted by SpecTerra Services Pty Ltd (SpecTerra). The airborne survey over the Busselton Health Campus site was undertaken on 10 March 2015.

The remote sensing survey involved the collection of a Digital Multi-Spectral Image (DMSI) of the site using a High Resolution Airborne Multispectral Sensor (HiRAMS) (Appendix A). The airborne image is corrected for camera distortion and scene brightness effects, before GeoTiff image products (including true colour image, false colour infrared image, pseudo colour plant cell density index image and composite change detection) are produced and analysed.

Change detection or PCD (infrared reflectance over red reflectance) change is a simple remote sensing image analysis technique for measuring plant cell density and health. The PCD is sensitive to the quantity of leaves in each pixel (sample) and the density of healthy plant cells in those leaves. The red band (675 nm) is positioned at maximum absorption by leaf chlorophyll content and the infrared band (780 nm) where the leaf structure of healthy plants strongly reflects incoming energy (Appendix A).

SpecTerra have five PCD change classes that reflect the gain or loss in PCD. SpecTerra have also included a sixth class that refers to trees that have been lost/removed between two data acquisition periods. The five PCD change classes are:

Less than (<) -50% – Maximum Loss in PCD. -50% to -30% – Moderate Loss in PCD. -30% to -10% – Minor Loss in PCD. -10% to 10% – No Significant Change in PCD. Greater than (>) 10% – Gain in PCD.



4

Following correction, production and analysis of the imagery, SpecTerra prepared a report detailing the calibrated mean and standard deviation of PCD values for identified tree canopy clusters (established during the baseline survey in March 2011 and excluding trees cleared in September 2012) collected during the survey and a comparison to previous fly-overs, referred to as ‘change detection’.

D ate:M XD :

Fi le N a m e :

0 0 10 0 2

0 0 30 0 40 0 5

0 0 6

0 0 70 0 80 0 90 1 00 1 1

0 1 20 1 30 1 4

0 1 50 1 60 1 7

0 1 80 1 9

0 2 00 2 10 2 20 2 30 2 4 0 2 5

0 2 60 2 7

0 2 80 2 9

0 3 0

0 3 1

0 3 20 3 3

0 3 40 3 5

0 3 60 3 70 3 80 3 9

0 4 00 4 10 4 2

0 4 30 4 40 4 5 0 4 6

0 4 7

0 4 8

0 4 9 0 5 00 5 1

0 5 20 5 30 5 40 5 5

0 5 60 5 70 5 8

0 5 9

0 6 00 6 10 6 2

0 6 3

0 6 40 6 5

0 6 60 6 7

0 6 80 6 9

0 7 00 7 1

0 7 20 7 3

0 7 40 7 50 7 6

0 7 70 7 8

0 7 9

0 8 0

0 8 10 8 20 8 3

0 8 40 8 50 8 6

0 8 7

0 8 80 8 9

0 9 00 9 1

0 9 20 9 3

0 9 40 9 5

0 9 60 9 70 9 80 9 91 0 0

1 0 1

1 0 21 0 31 0 4

1 0 5

1 0 61 0 7

1 0 81 0 91 1 0

1 1 11 1 21 1 3

1 1 41 1 5 1 1 6

1 1 71 1 8

1 1 91 2 01 2 11 2 2

1 2 3 1 2 41 2 51 2 61 2 7

1 2 81 2 91 3 0

1 3 11 3 2

1 3 31 3 41 3 51 3 6 1 3 71 3 8

1 4 21 4 3

1 4 41 4 5

1 4 61 4 7 1 4 8

1 4 9

1 5 0

1 7 5

1 7 6

1 7 7

1 7 8

1 8 3

1 8 4

1 8 71 8 8

2 0 2 2 0 4

2 0 52 0 6

2 0 72 0 8

2 0 9

2 1 0

2 1 1

2 1 2

2 1 42 1 5

2 1 6

2 1 72 1 8

2 1 92 2 02 2 1

2 2 2

2 2 32 2 4

2 2 5

2 2 62 2 72 2 8

2 2 9

2 3 02 3 1

2 3 22 3 3

2 3 42 3 5

2 3 6

2 3 72 3 8

2 3 9

2 4 02 4 12 4 2

2 4 3

2 4 42 4 5

2 4 6

2 4 7 2 4 8

2 4 9

2 5 0

1 8 9

2 5 12 5 2

2 5 32 5 4

2 5 5

2 5 6

2 5 72 5 82 5 9

2 6 0 2 6 12 6 2

2 6 32 6 4

2 6 52 6 62 6 7

2 6 8

2 6 92 7 0

2 7 12 7 2

2 7 32 7 4

2 7 52 7 7

2 7 8

2 7 9

2 8 02 8 1

2 8 2

34 4 ,1 0 0

34 4 ,1 0 0

34 4 ,2 0 0

34 4 ,2 0 0

34 4 ,3 0 0

34 4 ,3 0 0

6,274

,700

6,274

,700

6,274

,800

6,274

,800

6,274

,900

6,274

,900

6,275

,000

6,275

,000

6,275

,100

6,275

,100

F ig u re N o :

So urceC on se rvat io n a rea f ro m N a tu ra l A re a C o n su lta nts (Jun e 2 01 3 )R oa d n a m es f ro m L an d ga te .Ae ria l im a g ery fro m S pe c te rra (M a rch 2 01 5 ).

2T ra n s e c t a n d ta g g e d tre e lo c a tio n sM ar ch 2 0 15 T re e H e a lth M o n ito r in gB u s se l to n H e a lth C a m p u s

D ep ar tm e n t o f H e a l th

4 3 2 6 A B _ 0 0 7 _ F 0 0 2 _ G IS4 3 2 6 A B _ 0 0 7 _ G IS 0 0 2 _ v 0 _ 23 1 . 0 3 . 2 0 1 5

B u s s e ll H ig h w a y

M ill Ro ad

D R A F T

LE G E N DTag ge d treeTran se ctC on se rva tion a reaS ite bo und ary

N

Page s ize: A4

0 3 0m

Pro je ct io n: G D A 199 4 M G A Z one 50

Scale 1:2 ,000

Tran se ct 4

Tran se ct 3

Tran se ct 1

Tran se ct 2

TA G



6




7

3 Results

The data collected from the 138 tagged trees located along the four transects and the remaining 92 individually tagged trees during the March 2015 survey are provided in Appendix B.

3.1 Climate

The nearest public climate data is available from Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Station 009515 (Busselton Shire). For the three months prior the survey (December 2014 to February 2015) Busselton Shire received 1.4 mm of rainfall, 95.8% lower than the mean monthly rainfall of the same period (Figure 3) (BOM 2014).

The rainfall recorded at the Busselton Shire weather station since the previous 2014 March survey tree health assessment of 589 mm was 26.1% below the average monthly rainfall of 797 mm (BoM, 2015) (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Average long-term and 2014/2015 monthly rainfall totals from weather station No. 009515 (BOM, 2015)

The Busselton Shire weather station has received approximately 20% (3,219 mm compared to 4,064 mm) less annual rainfall from January 2010 to February 2014 (BoM, 2015). The actual monthly rainfall for the Busselton Shire from January 2010 through to September 2014 and the mean monthly average is provided in Appendix C for comparison.



8

3.2 Vigour

The mean combined vigour class value of 1.75 was recorded from the tagged trees during the March 2015 assessment (Table 1). The mean combined vigour class across the autumn monitoring periods (March surveys) showed an increasing trend from 2011 to 2014. The 2015 decrease of 0.14 in the mean combined vigour indicates an increase of live tree canopy and suggests the health of the tagged trees may be improving.

Table 1 Mean combined vigour class from autumn data (March 2011 to March 2015)

Survey Mean combined vigour class1

March 2011 1.60

March 2012 1.80

March 2013 1.86

March 2014 1.89

March 2015 1.75

Source: Coffey (2011a, 2012a, 2013b and 2014a). 1. A value of 1 indicates a healthy tree, while a value of 3 indicates an unhealthy, dying or dead tree.

Table 2 compares the mean vigour class ratings recorded across the four transects, the individually tagged trees and combined data across the autumn tree health assessments since 2011. Compared to the previous year (2014) all transects show a decrease in the vigour rating for autumn 2015, with transect 4 having the highest decrease in its vigour rating (13% decrease). The reduced vigour of all transects suggests there has been an improvement in tree health across the site since March 2014. The individually tagged trees also showed an increased vigour rating in March 2015 compared to the previous autumn surveys. The vigour ratings in 2015 are still above the original vigour ratings from the autumn survey in 2011.

Table 2 Mean vigour class of each transect, individual trees and combined data autumn tree health assessments 2011–2015

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Transect 1 1.75 2.03 2.05 2.11 1.98

Transect 2 1.65 2.02 1.97 1.87 1.73

Transect 3 1.74 1.87 1.91 2.06 1.91

Transect 4 1.86 2.00 1.90 2.00 1.74

Individual 1.47 1.63 1.69 1.69 1.58

Total 1.60 1.80 1.86 1.89 1.75

3.3 Crown density and foliage transparency

The mean crown density has declined by 2.4% since the original autumn (March 2011) monitoring period (Table 3), indicating a decline in tree health. The mean crown density decreased by 0.08% between the March 2014 and March 2015 monitoring events, this indicates a slight decrease in tree health since the previous autumn monitoring, but is considered negligible and thus stable since the previous monitoring (March 2014).

Mean foliage transparency (Table 3) is the inverse of mean crown density; therefore a decrease in crown density will result in an increase in foliage transparency and so is not discussed further.



9

Table 3 Mean crown density and mean foliage transparency

Survey Mean crown density (%) Mean foliage transparency (%)

March 2011 27.97 72.03

March 2012 25.94 74.06

March 2013 24.61 75.39

March 2014 25.65 74.35

March 2015 25.57 74.43

Source: Coffey (2011a, 2012a, 2013b and 2014a).

Table 4 shows a comparison of the mean crown density values across transects and individual trees for the autumn monitoring periods. There has been a decrease in crown density values for Transects 1, 2 and 3 from the initial September 2010 tree health assessment. There is an increase in crown density values for Transect 4 and the individually tagged trees (Table 4).

Transect 1 and Transect 2 have experienced the greatest decline in crown density since the March 2011 tree health assessment, approximately 23% and 15% respectively. Transect 3 has only recorded a slight reduction in crown density, with an approximate 7% reduction. Transect 4 and the individually tagged trees have had a slight increase in crown density, approximately 3% and 1% respectively.

Since the 2014 autumn tree health monitoring period, Transects 1 and 2 recorded a decrease in crown density. Transect 3 has not changed in crown density since March 2014 while Transects 3 and the individually tagged trees have recorded a slight increase in crown density values (Table 4).

Table 4 Comparison of the average crown density (%) across the four transects, individual trees and combined data of the tree health assessments for autumn surveys 2011–2015

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Transect 1 29.09 25.36 23.45 23.73 22.36

Transect 2 30.16 26.29 24.19 27.10 25.65

Transect 3 25.74 25.22 23.15 24.07 24.07

Transect 4 25.40 74.60 25.43 25.65 26.30

Individual 27.94 72.06 26.20 27.34 28.26

Combined 27.97 25.94 24.61 25.65 25.57

3.4 Crown dieback

The frequency of crown dieback categories using combined data (Transect 1 to 4 and Individual trees) from tree health assessments completed in autumn from March 2011 to March 2015, is presented in Figure 4 (Coffey, 2011a, 2012a, 2013b and 2014a). The monitoring undertaken in March 2015 identified evidence of crown dieback in all of the tagged trees and an increase in crown dieback (less trees in Category 1) when compared to the initial monitoring completed in March 2011.



10

Figure 4 Frequency of crown dieback categories from March 2011 to March 2015

Since March 2014 there has been an increase of trees in Category 1, 3 and 7 and a decrease of trees in Categories 2, 4, 5 and 6. (Figure 5, Appendix D). The comparison between crown dieback categories across the four transects, the individual trees and the combined data between all autumn assessments is presented in Appendix D.

It is difficult to identify a trend in crown dieback when comparing the results across the monitoring periods; however, a decrease in categories 4, 5 and 6 indicates trees are in a healthier state than in the March 2014 survey. A level of crown dieback from the tree is expected through natural attrition.

3.5 General tree observations

3.5.1 Insect damage

A total of 159 tagged trees showed some signs of insect damage through insect borers and/or termites during the autumn 2015 monitoring period. Borers were identified from 56 trees while termites were recorded from 103 trees (Figure 5).

There has been a decrease in the number of trees with termite and borer activity since October 2014. There has been a reduction of nine trees infested with termites and eight trees affected by borer activity. Twenty six trees were recorded as having borers and termites, a decrease of five trees since the previous October 2014 monitoring period. This may be a sign of improved tree health and subsequent ability to defend against insect attack.



11

Figure 5 Number of tagged trees showing insect borer and termite activity1

3.5.2 Pathogen presence

The majority of the trees assessed as part of the autumn 2015 tree health assessment were not affected by pathogens, with the exception of trees 008 and 257. The presence of pathogens and their fruiting bodies does not necessarily translate to unhealthy trees. The fungal pathogen was not identified; however, it is not considered to be Neofusicoccum australe, which is known to be an opportunistic pathogen responsible for crown dieback in Peppermint trees in Western Australia (Dakin et al., 2010). The presence of pathogens has remained relatively stable across the Health Campus (maximum of seven trees in March 2011 to zero trees in March 2012), throughout the autumn monitoring periods.

3.5.3 Epicormic growth

During the autumn 2015 monitoring, 28 of the tagged trees (12%) were identified with epicormic growth. This is a decrease in trees identified with epicormic growth when compared to the previous autumn assessment in 2014, when 70 trees (30%) were recorded with epicormic growth and the autumn 2011 assessment when 83 trees (28%) were identified with epicormic growth.

1 Source: Coffey, 2011a; 2011b; 2012a; 2012b; 2013b; 2013c; 2014a; 2014b.



12

3.5.4 Tree death

No new tree deaths were recorded between the spring 2014 and autumn 2015 monitoring periods. One tree that was previously recorded as collapsed in spring 2014 (Tag No. 057) is still present (i.e. has not been removed from the site).

3.5.5 Flowering/fruiting

As part of the autumn 2015 tree health monitoring, general tree observations were undertaken including evidence of flowering or fruiting. The vast majority of tagged trees (214 trees, 74%) were in various stages of fruiting at the time of the autumn 2015 survey, similar to the previous autumn 2014 survey which recorded 204 (88%) trees in a stage of fruiting.

It was also noted that areas near the Heath Campus building have been revegetated to include Peppermint saplings (Plate 1). The plantings of Peppermint saplings have also occurred in the conservation areas (Plate 2). Some existing Peppermint trees near areas of maintained lawns would appear to be receiving additional water (Plate 3) from irrigation systems.

Plate 1 Revegetated area Plate 2 Conservation area

Plate 3 Peppermint trees near irrigated lawns



13

3.5.6 Presence of Western Ringtail Possums and dreys

Four WRPs and ten dreys (nests constructed by the WRP were recorded within the 230 tagged trees during the autumn 2015 tree health assessment. The possums and dreys were scattered over the entire Busselton Health Campus site. A deceased WRP was recorded under tree Tag No. 073.

These recordings were opportunistic sightings and not considered to be a comprehensive assessment of the presence of WRPs at the site. Comprehensive WRP assessments have been undertaken by Coffey biannually since 2009.

3.6 Digital multi-spectral imagery

The true and false colour imagery for the March 2015 fly-over is provided in Appendices E and F. The March 2011 imagery has been used as baseline imagery for subsequent autumn flights to determine changes in the plant cell density (PCD), more commonly referred to as change detection.

A comparison between the autumn monitoring periods (March 2014 and March 2015) provides greater clarity in the leaf cell density change and mitigates change attributed to seasonal variation.

3.6.1 Change detection

The mean PCD value for the five autumn acquisition periods indicates that there has been a 16% increase in the mean PCD value (thus tree health) across the site since the first autumn 2011 data acquisition period. There has been an 8% decrease in PCD between the autumn 2014 and the autumn 2015 acquisition periods (Figure 6).

Figure 6 Mean plant cell density over the five autumn survey periods



14

Autumn 2014 to Autumn 2015

PCD change is depicted in the change detection map for the period March 2014 to March 2015 provided as Appendix G. DMSI mapping for this period indicated that approximately 9% of the Peppermints (and other trees) within the Busselton Health Campus recorded a greater than 10% increase in PCD values, and thus an increase in crown density and potentially tree health.

Approximately 32% of the trees within the Busselton Health Campus are showing very little change in PCD values (± 10%), while around 37% of trees recorded a decrease in PCD greater than 10%. Fourteen (1.6%) trees scattered throughout the survey area showed a moderate loss (50–30% loss) and five trees have been removed since the autumn 2014 survey (these five tree are inclusive of the four trees removed before the spring 2014 monitoring period). No trees were identified as having recorded a maximum loss (greater than 50%) of PCD within the campus between the autumn 2014 and autumn 2015 data acquisition periods (Appendix G).

Autumn 2011 to Autumn 2015

PCD change mapping for the Busselton Health Campus for the period March 2011 to March 2015 was examined for comparison. DMSI mapping and change detection for this period indicated that 58% of the trees showed a greater than 10% increase in PCD. Approximately 16% of the trees within the campus showed stable (± 10%) PCD value, while 5% of the trees have had a minor decrease (-10% to -30%) in PCD values and 1% of trees with a PCD value of -50% to -30%. None of the trees were recorded with a maximum loss (greater than 50%) of PCD between the autumn 2011 and autumn 2015 data acquisition periods (Appendix H).



15

4 Discussion

Based on the autumn 2015 results of the on-ground visual tree assessment and the results of the DMSI aerial imagery, the health of the tagged trees is considered to be in a stable to improving condition. Three of the values recorded during the monitoring period are considered particularly useful in determining tree health change, namely crown density (on-ground); canopy vigour (on-ground) and PCD change (DMSI aerial imagery).

The remainder of the recorded values (crown dieback and general tree health observations; epicormic growth, pathogens and insect activity) provide additional information and potential explanations to tree health improvement or decline when discussed in context with the remaining values, but are not considered to be directly useful values in determining tree health.

Table 5 summarises the improvement, stability and decline in tree health based on vigour, crown density and PCD values between the original autumn 2011 assessment, the autumn 2014 assessment and the autumn 2015 assessment. A change greater than 5% between the two monitoring periods (2011 to 2015 and 2014 to 2015) is considered to be significant in this situation.

Table 5 Summary of tree health state between spring monitoring periods

Survey time Improving Stable/neutral Declining

Vigour 2011–2015

2014–2015

Crown Density 2011–2015

2014–2015

PCD Value 2011–2015

2014–2015

The WRP Management Plan has identified contingency measures to be undertaken if certain trigger levels relating to tree canopy health are met or exceeded. If these trigger levels are met or exceeded the DoH will notify and consult with the DER and the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW) to discuss whether the decline is a local or regional occurrence. The trigger levels for decline in tree health are:

A catastrophic decline, considered a 20% or greater reduction in tree canopy; or

A general decline in tree health of 30% or greater of the entire site (as determined through aerial imagery).

For the purposes of tree canopy health, the baseline values are those recorded during the March and October tree health monitoring periods immediately prior to the development of the Busselton Health Campus. The construction of the Busselton Health Campus occurred in late 2012, therefore the March and October 2012 results are considered to be the pre-construction baseline values.

There is very little meaning in comparing October and March results due to seasonal variability, therefore, the March (autumn) tree health monitoring periods is compared against the March 2012 monitoring period (March pre-construction baseline), while the October (spring) tree health monitoring periods is compared against the October 2012 monitoring period (October pre-construction baseline).

An assessment of the autumn 2015 results against their March pre-construction baseline trigger levels is presented in Table 6.



16

Table 6 Assessment of tree health against the spring trigger levels

Trigger Level Marchbaseline values1

Trigger values

Autumn 2015

values

Percentage change

Has it been triggered?

20% or greater reduction in tree canopy (Crown Density)

25.94% 20.75% 25.57% -1.43% No

30% or greater decline in tree health (PCD)

694 486 703 1.3% No

1 The Autumn 2012 data has been used as the baseline (i.e. pre-construction).

The tagged trees located across the Busselton Health Campus have shown a decrease (-1.43% change) in crown density since the baseline survey (autumn 2012) as shown in Table 6. However, there has been a 16.34% increase in PCD values across the Busselton Health Campus (Table 6).

Based on the comparisons between the March 2012 baseline (i.e. pre-construction) and the current March 2015 data, the trigger levels have not been exceeded and consultation with DER and DPaW is not required (Table 6).

Ongoing monitoring of the health of the trees is undertaken on a six-monthly basis in consideration of the trigger levels set out in the approved WRP Management Plan. The next tree health monitoring will be conducted in October 2015.



17

5 Recommendations

Based on the results of the March 2015 tree health assessment, the following management measures may be implemented to minimise the decline in tree health at the site and to identify additional factors (abiotic or biotic) that may be impacting on the health of the trees:

Review the rehabilitation management plan to determine if the current approved Integrated Pest Management (IPM) plan is adequate to manage observed insect activity.

Undertake supplementary watering, where necessary, including during prolonged periods of drought or high tree stress events (i.e. strong drying winds).

Discuss options of nutrient enrichment of trees located at the site with GeoCatch or an equivalent organisation. Implement nutrient enrichment to assist with improving the health of the trees.

An assessment by a qualified arborist may be necessary to determine whether unknown and external factors are influencing the health of Peppermint trees at the site.

Review the groundwater levels in the Busselton region with the Department of Water to determine whether the groundwater table is being drawn down in the area which may be affecting tree health.

Continue to minimise vehicle access over the hospital grounds where there are no formal parking bays or driveways to prevent soil compaction and damage to tree roots (especially the fine feeder roots that are located closer to the surface).

Ensure on-site works (i.e. the dismantling of the old hospital) do not impact on the trees that remain within the Busselton Hospital Campus site.

Where practical, obtain regional DMSI data from SpecTerra to determine whether the decline in tree health is restricted to the Busselton Health Campus site, or reflective of the wider Busselton region.

Liaise with the regional DPaW office and the Centre of Excellence for Climate Change, Woodland and Forest Health (hosted by Murdoch University), regarding details of regional Peppermint tree studies that have been, are currently, or proposed to occur, in the South-west of Western Australia.

Where practicable, the natural regeneration of the Peppermint seedlings on site should be protected and managed to ensure survival and to increase the Peppermint coverage within the site.



18

his page has been left intentionally blank.



19

6 References

Bureau of Meteorology [BOM]. 2015. Daily Weather Observations. Retrieved [March 2015], from www.bom.gov.au/climate

Coffey Environments. 2011a. Tree Health and Western Ringtail Possum Habitat Assessment Busselton Hospital Site. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health and the Department of Treasury and Finance. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2010/231 Version 6.

Coffey Environments. 2011b. Tree Health Monitoring Busselton Hospital Site September 2011/October 2011. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health and the Department of Treasury and Finance. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2012/153 Version 2.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd (Coffey). 2012a. Tree Health Monitoring Busselton Hospital Site March 2012. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health and the Department of Treasury and Finance. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2011/186 Version 1.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd (Coffey). 2012b. Tree Health Monitoring Busselton Hospital Site October 2012. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health and the Department of Treasury and Finance. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2012/198 Version 3.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd (Coffey). 2013a. Western Ringtail Possum Management Plan, Department of Health Busselton Hospital Health Campus Redevelopment, August 2013. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2011-143 Version 9 Final.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd (Coffey). 2013b. Tree Health Monitoring Busselton Hospital Site March 2013. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health and the Department of Treasury and Finance. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2013/039 Version 3.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd (Coffey). 2013c. October 2013 Tree Health Monitoring. Busselton Hospital Health Campus. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2013/199 Version 3.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd (Coffey). 2014a. March 2014 Tree Health Monitoring. Busselton Health Campus. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2014/033, Version 1. April 2014.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd (Coffey). 2014b. October 2014 Tree Health Monitoring. Busselton Health Campus. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Health. Coffey Environments Report No. EP2014/136, Version 2. November 2014.

Dakin, N., White, D., Hardy, G. and Burgess, T. 2010. The opportunistic pathogen, Neofusicoccum australe, is responsible for crown dieback of Peppermint (Agonis flexuosa) in Western Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology, CSIRO Publishing, Vol 39, pg 202-206.



20


Appendix A Tree health monitoring procedure (Coffey 2013a)

Tree health monitoring procedure This procedure has been prepared to outline the Tree Health Monitoring procedure to be implemented within the Conservation Area of the Busselton Health Campus site and is also detailed in the Busselton Health Campus – Revegetation Management Plan. The baseline for the tree health monitoring was undertaken in September 2010 with a follow-up survey undertaken in March 2011. These two survey periods represent baseline data for winter (September; after winter rain) and summer (March; after summer drought) health of the trees. The methodology employed utilised a combination of on-ground visual survey and digital multi-spectral imagery. The methodology for each survey method is described below.

On-ground visual health survey The on-ground visual health survey involved the establishment of four transects of 100 m in length and the tagging of 152 individual trees along these transects, within the site (112 in September 2010 and a further 40 in March 2011). Every tree along the transect 5m either side of the transect centreline was also tagged (138 trees). This equated to a total of 290 trees tagged throughout the site. The tags were attached with wire loosely wound around the tree in a way which would not hinder future growth and girth expansion of the tree.

The September 2010 winter baseline survey was undertaken on 21 and 22 September 2010 and the March 2011 summer baseline survey was undertaken on 24 and 25 March 2011.

The four transects were established within areas of dense canopy growth in the north of the site and the southwest corner. Posts were left in the ground at 10m intervals with photos taken from each post. Photos were also taken from the north side of every individual tree during the first monitoring period, where practicable. These photos may or may not be used in determining the health of the tagged trees. The following information was collected from each tagged tree within the site:

• Species – The species identification of each tree tagged was recorded (e.g. Agonis flexuosa).

• Estimated height – The height of each tagged tree was estimated visually to the nearest half metre (e.g. the nearest 0.5 m).

• Number of trunks – The number of trunks originating from the base of the tree was counted. This value can be fairly arbitrary with the possibility of two or more trees considered to be the one tree.

• Crown Position – The position of the crown was estimated based on the height of the tree and is considered to be a function of the individual live crown in relation to the surrounding overstorey. Tree height between 2.5 m and 7 m was considered to have a Lower Crown Position; tree height between 7.5 m and 8.5 m was considered to have a Middle Crown Position; and tree height exceeding 9 m was considered to have an Upper Crown Position;

• Vigour – A visual assessment of the crown vigour of individual trees classified into three categories. Vigour Class 1 is trees that are considered to have a healthy percentage of live canopy and Vigour Class 3 are trees that are considered to have a very poor-degraded percentage of live canopy. Vigour Class 2 are trees that are considered to be somewhere between healthy and unhealthy.

The Vigour Class ratings ranged from 1 (for a healthy tree) through to 3 (for an unhealthy, dying or dead tree) with a rating of 1.5 or 2.5 used for trees considered to be in between either 1 and 2 or 2 and 3.

• Crown Density – Is an estimate of the proportion of the crown volume that contains biomass (e.g. green foliage, branches and reproductive structures) compared to if the entire canopy was well vegetated (e.g. 100%). Crown density is recorded as a percentage or calculated using recognised methodology. Canopy cover can also be estimated from the remote sensing imagery described below;

• Foliage Transparency – Is an estimate of the absence of foliage where foliage would normally occur. Foliage transparency is directly related to Crown Density. Foliage Transparency is recorded as a percentage;

• Crown Dieback – Is a measure of the proportion of the crown that has experienced recent dieback from branchlets and canopy branches. Crown Dieback has been recorded into one of seven categories based on a percentage of crown dieback. The categories are:

– 0 to 5% = Category 1. – 6 to 10% = Category 2. – 11 to 20% = Category 3. – 21 to 40% = Category 4. – 41 to 60% = Category 5. – 61 to 80% = Category 6. – 81 to 100% = Category 7.

• General Tree Observations – The following observations of each tagged tree were also recorded. These observations do not generally suggest a tree is in decline;

– Insect Damage – Notes were taken from each tagged tree on obvious signs of insect damage (e.g. damage from Insect Borers). Generally trees are able to cope with some form of insect activity and trees provide a niche for many insect species (e.g. spiders);

– Pathogens – Notes were taken from each tagged tree if obvious signs of pathogens were evident (e.g. cankers, fruiting bodies);

– Epicormic Growth – Notes were taken from each tagged tree if epicormic growth was seen. Epicormic growth is a response to stress (e.g. fire) and new shoots are produced from epicormic buds;

– Flowering and/or Fruiting – Notes were taken from each tagged tree if the tree was flowering or had new fruits; and

– The Presence of Possums or Dreys – Notes were taken from each tagged tree if a possum was recorded from within the tree (asleep in the tree during the day) or a possum drey was recorded from the tree.

Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) was not taken during this survey. DBH are considered to be a long term tool for determining tree health and data is generally only collected once every year or two. It was decided not to be collected during the initial baseline (winter and summer) surveys because they had already been collected in 2009 by SurvCon Pty Ltd during a survey of the trees located on the site. It is expected that DBH values will be collected in 2011.

Digital multi-spectral imagery SpecTerra Services provide airborne remote sensing imagery for vegetation mapping and monitoring projects. SpecTerra were commissioned to provide a Digital Multi-Spectral Imagery (DMSI) of the hospital site and surrounds to provide accurate imagery of the health of the vegetation. The initial fly-over is considered to be baseline and further subsequent flights will allow comparisons to be made between the fly-overs. SpecTerra refer to this as ‘change detection’. The technique can be used to determine whether the vegetation is improving or declining based on plant cell density values.

SpecTerra Services undertook the initial fly-over on 1 October 2010 using a HiRAMs07-01 camera with a 28.00 mm focal length with a CCD (Charge-Coupled Device) array size of 2048 x 2048 with an acquisition resolution of 0.25 m to capture the digital imagery.

SpecTerra Services undertook the follow-up flight on 14 March 2011 using a HiRAMS0803 camera utilising the same focal length, CCD array size and acquisition resolution as the October 2010 fly-over.

The imagery’s were taken at four band lengths ranging from Blue (450 nm) to Near Infra-red (780 nm) with additional Green (550 nm) and Red (675 nm) Band lengths.

Using the data obtained from the fly-overs, SpecTerra are also able to compare Plant Cell Density (PCD) values between the subsequent flights to determine whether there is a notable PCD change between the different flight periods.

The two flight periods are considered to be winter and summer baseline data with meaningful results determined from comparative flight times (e.g. September 2010 compared to September 2011).

Appendix B Tree health data March 2015 survey

Appendix BTree Health Data March 2015 survey

Height DBHCrown

PositionVigour Class

Crown Density

Foliage Transparency

Insects PathogensEpicormic

Growth

(m) (mm)Upper/Middle/

LowerRating 1-3 % % Yes/No Category Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No

T1 001 Agonis flexuosa 7 4 98 Lower/Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 1 Yes No NoT1 002 Agonis flexuosa 8.5-9 1 245 Middle/Upper 2.5 15 85 Yes 4 Yes No No FruitsT1 003 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 2 256 Upper 2.5 17 83 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 004 Agonis flexuosa 9 3 269 Middle/Upper 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 005 Agonis flexuosa 9 1 273 Middle/Upper 2.5 20 80 Yes 4 Yes No Yes FruitsT1 006 Agonis flexuosa 9-9.5 1 204 Upper 3 10 90 Yes 4 No No No FruitsT1 007 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 173 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 008 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 125 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes Yes Yes FruitsT1 009 Agonis flexuosa 6-7 1 127 Lower/Middle 2.5 10 90 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT1 010 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 225 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT1 011 Agonis flexuosa 7 7 107 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No Yes DreyT1 012 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 145 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 2 No No YesT1 013 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 97 Lower 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 Yes No NoT1 014 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 3 301 Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 015 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 115 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No Yes FruitsT1 016 Agonis flexuosa 9 1 295 Middle/Upper 1 40 60 Yes 1 No No No FruitsT1 017 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 2 282 Middle/Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 018 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 1 388 Upper 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 019 Agonis flexuosa 4.5 1 62 Lower 2.5 10 90 Yes 3 No No NoT1 020 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 201 Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No Yes FruitsT1 021 Agonis flexuosa 7.5-8 5 147 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 2 No No Yes FruitsT1 022 Agonis flexuosa 4.5 1 100 Lower 2 25 75 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 023 Agonis flexuosa 8.5-9 1 265 Middle/Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 024 Agonis flexuosa 8.5-9 2 265 Middle/Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 025 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 3 111 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 026 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 112 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 2 No No No Fruits Drey & PossumT1 027 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 96 Lower/Middle 2 18 82 Yes 2 Yes No YesT1 028 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 264 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 029 Agonis flexuosa 8 4 150 Middle 2 25 75 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 030 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 2 227 Middle/Upper 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 031 Agonis flexuosa 7 4 125 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 032 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 212 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT1 033 Eucalyptus sp. 7 1 237 Lower/Middle 1 45 55 Yes 3 No No NoT1 034 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 3 158 Lower 2 25 75 Yes 3 No No Yes FruitsT1 035 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 154 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 036 Melaleuca sp. 6 1 272 Lower 1 45 55 Yes 3 No No No Fruits Drey x2T1 037 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 211 Middle 2 15 85 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 038 Agonis flexuosa 8 4 136 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 039 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 3 252 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No Yes FruitsT1 040 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 192 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 041 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 3 237 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 042 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 209 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 043 Agonis flexuosa 5.5 1 Lower 3 0 100 Yes 7 Yes No NoT1 044 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 210 Middle 2.5 15 85 Yes 4 No No Yes FruitsT1 045 Agonis flexuosa 6 2 Lower 3 0 100 Yes 7 No No NoT1 046 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 156 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 047 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 338 Middle 3 5 95 Yes 6 Yes No No FruitsT1 048 Agonis flexuosa 4 1 76 Lower 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 No No No Fruits

Possums/ DreysFlowering/

Fruiting

Transect No. or

IndividualTag No. Species

No. of Trunks

Crown Dieback

1


Height DBHCrown


Crown Density



Growth




Fruiting

Transect No. or


No. of Trunks

Crown Dieback

T1 049 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 3 198 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT1 050 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 3 269 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT1 051 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 104 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 052 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 110 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT1 053 Melaleuca sp. 2.2 1 100 Lower 1 60 40 Yes 1 No No No FlowersT1 054 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 2 150 Upper 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT1 055 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 294 Middle 3 10 90 Yes 6 Yes No Yes FruitsT2 056 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 140 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT2 057 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 Lower/Middle 3 0 100 Yes 7 No No No Fallen overT2 058 Agonis flexuosa 8 6 256 Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No Yes FruitsT2 059 Agonis flexuosa 10 4 352 Upper 1.5 40 60 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 060 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 183 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 061 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 1 205 Middle/Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 062 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 1 265 Middle/Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsT2 063 Agonis flexuosa 9 1 219 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 064 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 4 307 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT2 065 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 246 Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT2 066 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 297 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 067 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 296 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 068 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 196 Middle 1 45 55 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 069 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 1 311 Middle/Upper 2 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT2 070 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 344 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 071 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 444 Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 072 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 1 476 Middle/Upper 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT2 073 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 520 Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No Fruits Dead Possum on groundT2 074 Agonis flexuosa 7.5-8 1 545 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT2 075 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 311 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT2 076 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 234 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 077 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 357 Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 078 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 120 Lower 2 15 85 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT2 079 Agonis flexuosa 9 3 563 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT2 080 Agonis flexuosa 5.5-6 2 185 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT2 081 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 3 244 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT2 082 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 396 Lower/Middle 1 35 65 Yes 1 No No No FruitsT2 083 Agonis flexuosa 5.5 3 152 Lower 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT2 084 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 443 Lower/Middle 1.5 35 65 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 085 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 411 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT2 086 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 389 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT3 087 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 164 Lower/Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT3 088 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 625 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT3 089 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 175 Lower 3 3 97 Yes 7 Yes No NoT3 090 Agonis flexuosa 5 3 130 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsT3 091 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 399 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT3 092 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 233 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT3 093 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 122 Lower/Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No Yes FruitsT3 094 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 198 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT3 095 Agonis flexuosa 6 10 90 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No Yes FruitsT3 096 Agonis flexuosa 5.5 2 98 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 2 Yes No Yes Fruits

2


Height DBHCrown


Crown Density



Growth




Fruiting

Transect No. or


No. of Trunks

Crown Dieback

T3 097 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 1 387 Upper 1 35 65 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT3 098 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 4 269 Upper 1 40 60 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT3 099 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 261 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT3 100 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 163 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 1 No No No FruitsT3 101 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 330 Lower/Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT3 102 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 2 361 Middle 3 15 85 Yes 4 Yes No No FruitsT3 103 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 224 Middle 3 15 85 Yes 4 Yes No No FruitsT3 104 Agonis flexuosa 10 1 443 Upper 3 10 90 Yes 5 Yes No No FruitsT3 105 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 169 Lower/Middle 3 2 98 Yes 7 No No No FruitsT3 106 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 314 Middle 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT3 107 Agonis flexuosa 5 3 173 Lower 1.5 35 65 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT3 108 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 188 Lower/Middle 3 0 100 Yes 7 No No NoT3 109 Agonis flexuosa 7 3 135 Lower/Middle 2.5 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT3 110 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 2 248 Middle/Upper 1 40 60 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsT3 111 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 279 Lower 1 40 60 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsT3 112 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 5 456 Middle/Upper 1 40 60 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsT3 113 Agonis flexuosa 7 7 183 Lower/Middle 1 35 65 Yes 1 No No No FruitsT4 114 Agonis flexuosa 10 3 452 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT4 115 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 1 444 Upper 1 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT4 116 Agonis flexuosa 10 1 Upper 3 0 100 Yes 7 Yes No NoT4 117 Agonis flexuosa 10 3 148 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT4 118 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 4 255 Middle/Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 No No Yes FruitsT4 119 Agonis flexuosa 9 5 132 Upper 2 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT4 120 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 198 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT4 121 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 225 Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT4 122 Agonis flexuosa 8 5 78 Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT4 123 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 3 316 Middle/Upper 3 10 90 Yes 5 Yes No No FruitsT4 124 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 1 272 Middle/Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT4 125 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 1 405 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT4 126 Agonis flexuosa 10 6 200 Upper 1 35 65 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsT4 127 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 6 104 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT4 128 Agonis flexuosa 9 3 122 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsT4 129 Agonis flexuosa 7 6 345 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsT4 130 Agonis flexuosa 9 3 204 Upper 1 35 65 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT4 131 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 190 Lower 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 No No NoT4 132 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 3 124 Lower/Middle 3 10 90 Yes 4 Yes No NoT4 133 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 3 388 Middle/Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 No No No FruitsT4 134 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 223 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT4 135 Agonis flexuosa 10 1 338 Upper 1 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsT4 136 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 2 295 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No Yes FruitsT4 137 Agonis flexuosa 10 2 387 Upper 1 35 65 Yes 2 No No No FruitsT4 138 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 3 110 Lower/Middle 2 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 143 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 202 Lower 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 144 Agonis flexuosa 6 2 200 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No Yes FruitsI 146 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 168 Lower 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 147 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 454 Middle 2.0 20 80 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 148 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 230 Lower 1.5 25 75 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 149 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 353 Lower 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 Yes No No Fruits

3


Height DBHCrown


Crown Density



Growth




Fruiting

Transect No. or


No. of Trunks

Crown Dieback

I 150 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 5 231 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No Fruits DreyI 175 Agonis flexuosa 4.5 3 160 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 176 Agonis flexuosa 6 2 152 Lower 1.0 45 65 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 177 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 228 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 178 Agonis flexuosa 5 2 150 Lower 1.0 45 55 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 183 Agonis flexuosa 6 2 152 Lower 1.0 40 60 Yes 1 Yes No No Fruits Drey x2, Possum x1I 184 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 117 Lower 1.0 35 65 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 187 Agonis flexuosa 6 4 120 Lower 1 35 65 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 188 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 189 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 204 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 354 Middle 2.5 15 85 Yes 4 Yes No No FruitsI 205 Agonis flexuosa 5.5 1 260 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 206 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 243 Lower 1 40 60 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 207 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 595 Lower 1.5 35 65 Yes 2 Yes No No Fruits Possum x 1I 208 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 2 200 Lower 2.5 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 209 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 398 Lower 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 No No Yes FruitsI 210 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 418 Lower 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 211 Agonis flexuosa 6 2 311 Lower 2 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 212 Agonis flexuosa 4.5 1 382 Lower 1 40 60 Yes 1 No No Yes FruitsI 214 Agonis flexuosa 9 1 765 Upper 1.5 50 70 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 215 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 325 Middle 2 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 216 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 581 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 217 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 203 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 218 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 219 Agonis flexuosa 4 2 142 Lower 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 220 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 255 Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 221 Agonis flexuosa 8 3 910 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 222 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 234 Lower/Middle 1.0 35 65 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 223 Agonis flexuosa 7 2 258 Lower/Middle 1.0 35 65 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 224 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 625 Lower/Middle 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 225 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 335 Lower/Middle 1.5 40 60 Yes 2 No No Yes FruitsI 226 Agonis flexuosa 8 4 351 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 227 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 204 Middle 1 40 60 Yes 2 Yes No Yes FruitsI 228 Agonis flexuosa 7 4 168 Lower/Middle 1 35 65 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 229 Agonis flexuosa 5 2 185 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 230 Agonis flexuosa 5 3 187 Lower 1 30 70 Yes 2 No No No Fruits Drey x1I 231 Agonis flexuosa 5.5 4 121 Lower 1 35 65 Yes 1 No No No Fruits Drey x1I 232 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 149 Lower 1.0 35 65 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 233 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 2 499 Middle/Upper 2.0 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 234 Agonis flexuosa 12 1 524 Upper 1.0 40 60 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 235 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 2 229 Middle/Upper 1 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 236 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 1 371 Middle/Upper 1.0 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 237 Agonis flexuosa 9 2 142 Upper 1.0 40 60 Yes 2 Yes No No Fruits Drey x1I 238 Agonis flexuosa 10.5 3 306 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 239 Agonis flexuosa 10 2 275 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 240 Agonis flexuosa 6 1 213 Lower 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 241 Agonis flexuosa 10 2 400 Upper 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 No No Yes FruitsI 242 Agonis flexuosa 10 2 333 Upper 1.5 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 243 Agonis flexuosa 9 1 317 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 No No No Fruits

4


Height DBHCrown


Crown Density



Growth




Fruiting

Transect No. or


No. of Trunks

Crown Dieback

I 244 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 3 195 Middle/Upper 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 245 Agonis flexuosa 8 2 134 Middle 1.5 20 80 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 246 Agonis flexuosa 8 1 327 Middle 1.0 35 65 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 247 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 202 Lower/Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 248 Agonis flexuosa 9 1 335 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No Yes FruitsI 249 Agonis flexuosa 10 2 443 Upper 1 35 65 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 250 Agonis flexuosa 8 6 258 Middle 1.0 40 60 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 251 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 6 89 Upper 1.5 35 65 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 252 Agonis flexuosa 6 4 245 Middle 1.5 25 75 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 253 Agonis flexuosa 10 6 278 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 254 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 2 468 Upper 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 255 Agonis flexuosa 9 5 255 Upper 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 256 Agonis flexuosa 11 7 184 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 257 Agonis flexuosa 9.5 1 695 Upper 2.0 25 75 Yes 3 Yes Yes No Fruits Possum x1I 258 Agonis flexuosa 8 8 391 Middle 1.0 40 60 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 259 Agonis flexuosa 10 1 625 Upper 2.5 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 260 Agonis flexuosa 10 7 280 Upper 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No Yes FruitsI 261 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 4 155 Middle 2.0 25 75 Yes 4 Yes No No FruitsI 262 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 186 Lower 1.5 25 75 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 263 Agonis flexuosa 11.5 5 98 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 264 Agonis flexuosa 10.5 7 86 Upper 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 265 Agonis flexuosa 11 7 244 Upper 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 266 Agonis flexuosa 11 3 323 Upper 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No Yes FruitsI 267 Agonis flexuosa 9 2 395 Upper 3.0 10 90 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 268 Agonis flexuosa 9 5 235 Upper 1.5 30 70 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 269 Agonis flexuosa 10 1 539 Upper 2.0 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 270 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 181 Lower 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 271 Agonis flexuosa 5.5 3 182 Lower 1.0 35 65 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 272 Agonis flexuosa 8.5 1 240 Middle 1.0 35 65 Yes 1 Yes No Yes FruitsI 273 Agonis flexuosa 11.5 5 343 Upper 1.0 45 55 Yes 1 Yes No No FruitsI 274 Agonis flexuosa 7 1 312 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 275 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 1 316 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 1 No No No FruitsI 276 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 187 Lower 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 277 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 153 Lower 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 No No No FruitsI 279 Agonis flexuosa 6.5 1 730 Lower 2.0 20 80 Yes 3 No No No FruitsI 280 Agonis flexuosa 7.5 3 439 Middle 1.5 30 70 Yes 2 Yes No No FruitsI 281 Agonis flexuosa 6 2 147 Lower 2.0 25 75 Yes 3 Yes No No FruitsI 282 Agonis flexuosa 5 1 188 Lower 2.5 15 85 Yes 3 No No No Fruits

Note: insects present 'yes' blue font refers to borers, 'yes' red font refers to termites, 'yes' green font refers to termites and borers

5

This page has been left intentionally blank

Appendix C Monthly rainfall totals (January 2010 to February 2015) and mean

monthly rainfall for weather station 009515 (BOM 2014)

Appendix D Crown dieback

Appendix DNumber and percentage of trees recorded in each crown dieback category for all autumn tree health assessments

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

1 (0-5%) 16 (29) 8 (15) 14 (25) 2 (4) 3 (5) 7 (23) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (3) 2 (6) 11 (41) 2 (15) 7 (26) 0 (0) 6 (22) 7 (28) 4 (16) 2 (8) 4 (16) 2 (8)

2 (6-10%) 9 (16) 15 (27) 10 (18) 27 (49) 23 (42) 8 (26) 11 (35) 11 (35) 19 (61) 10 (32) 6 (22) 13 (48) 10 (37) 13 (48) 11 (41) 6 (24) 6 (24) 14 (56) 13 (52) 8 (32)

3 (11-20%) 15 (27) 11 (20) 15 (27) 17 (31) 21 (38) 9 (29) 8 (26) 16 (52) 10 (32) 18(58) 5 (19) 5 (19) 4 (15) 7 (26) 4 (15) 8 (32) 10 (40) 5 (20) 5 (20) 12 (48)

4 (21-40%) 9 (16) 12 (22) 11 (20) 4 (7) 4 (7) 6 (19) 9 (29) 3 (10) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4 (15) 2 (7) 4 (15) 4 (15) 2 (7) 3 (12) 3 (12) 2 (8) 1 (4) 1 (4)

5 (41-60%) 2 (4) 2 (4) 0 (0) 1 (2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (6) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (4) 2 (7) 0 (0) 1 (4) 1 (4) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (4)

6 (61-80%) 1 (2) 1 (2) 2 (4) 2 (4) 2 (4) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (4) 0 (0) 1 (4) 1 (4) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)

7 (81-100%)

3 (5) 6 (11) 3 (5) 3 (5) 2 (4) 1 (3) 1 (3) 1 (3) 1 (3) 1 (3) 0 (0) 1 (4) 2 (7) 1 (4) 3 (11) 0 (0) 1 (4) 2 (8) 2 (8) 1 (4)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

1 (0-5%) 75 (49) 44 (29) 31 (34) 24 (26) 21 (23) 116 (40) 60 (21) 54 (23) 31 (13) 34 (15)

2 (6-10%) 45 (30) 53 (35) 35 (38) 39 (42) 31 (34) 74 (26) 98 (34) 80 (35) 111 (48) 83 (36)

3 (11-20%) 15 (10) 40 (26) 17 (18) 20 (22) 38 (41) 52 (18) 74 (26) 57 (25) 59 (26) 93 (40)

4 (21-40%) 12 (8) 8 (5) 6 (7) 8 (9) 2 (2) 34 (12) 34 (12) 26 (11) 17 (7) 9 (4)

5 (41-60%) 4 (3) 5 (3) 1 (1) 1 (1) 0 (0) 7 (2) 11 (4) 1 (1) 3 (1) 2 (1)

6 (61-80%) 0 (0) 1 (1) 1 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (1) 3 (1) 3 (1) 3 (1) 2 (1)

7 (81-100%)

1 (1) 1 (1) 1 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 5 (2) 10 (3) 9 (4) 6 (3) 7 (3)

Brackets indicate the percentage of each value for each category and transect

Crown Dieback Category

Individual CombinedNo. of Trees (%)

Crown Dieback Category

No. of Trees (%)

Transect 1 Transect 2 Transect 3 Transect 4

Appendix E SpecTerra Services – March 2015 DMSI true imagery

Appendix F SpecTerra Services – March 2015 DMSI false imagery

Appendix G SpecTerra Services – Busselton Hospital change detection

March 2014 to March 2015

Appendix H SpecTerra Services – Busselton Hospital change detection

March 2011 to March 2015

department of health march 2015 tree health monitoring · annual monitoring will be undertaken in...

Documents