forest practices news...update existing fpos on changes to forest practices system. forest practices...

1 Forest Practices News vol 4 no 3

April 2002 vol 4 no 3 ISSN 1441-1288

Forest Practices

newsPublished by the Forest Practices Board, 30 Patrick Street, Hobart – Tasmania – 7000

phone (03) 6233 7966; fax (03) 6233 7954; email [email protected] – www.fpb.tas.gov.auArticles from this newsletter may be reproduced.

Acknowledgement of the author and the Forest Practices Board is requested.The views expressed in this newsletter are not necessarily those of the Forest Practices Board

Noticeboard ........................ 2

Flora ................................... 3

Book review ........................ 4

Feature ............................... 5

Cultural Heritage ............... 9

Fauna ................................ 11

Geomorphology ................ 14

Web sightings .................. 15

contents

The Ken Felton eraGraham Wilkinson, Chief Forest Practices Officer, Forest Practices Board

Ken Felton retired from the Forest Practices Board in December2001 after long and distinguished service to the managementof Tasmania’s forests. Ken began his career in forestry as anundergraduate at Bangor in North Wales. His interest intravel and forestry then took him to New York State where hecompleted a Masters degree in Forestry. By 1961 he was enroute to Tasmania, where he served his apprenticeship inforest assessment, planning and plantation layout at Fingal.At this time he met Heather, got married and travelled throughEurope for 12 months. Back in Tasmania he commenced acareer in native forest silvicultural research, working atMaydena, Geeveston and Hobart. This was the era ofpioneering research into the ecology and silviculture ofnative eucalypt forests, with Ken part of the illustrious cadreof Max Gilbert, Murray Cunningham, Bob Ellis and TonyMount. Despite his love of working in the bush, Ken wasdestined for senior administrative office, first as Chief of theSilvicultural Research and Development Division, then asCommissioner (Management) in 1987. Ken was the inauguralChair of the Forest Practices Board upon its creation in 1994.

Last issue, The Black Box metamorphosed into The Grey Area, which hasnow evolved into The White Board (hopefully, it won’t fade into nothingnessnext issue). We’d like to see people treating FPNews itself as a white boardtoo, using it to exchange information on forest practices in Tasmania andbeyond. We are delighted with the articles coming in from FPOs and others(outside Forest Practices Board staff) involved in forest management. Writean article, send a photo, prepare a book review, let us know of some relevantweb sites you’ve visited lately…the options are endless!

The previous issue saw the beginning of Web Sightings. If anyone has aninteresting or useful forest practices related web site they’ve visited, pleasetell us so we can include it in our column. This issue also sees the secondBook Review in the newsletter. Please feel free to submit a book review forconsideration, particularly if there is a publication out there that you thinkwe should all know about.

Time to sit back and enjoy this issue of FPNews. We hope the range ofarticles makes interesting reading. Many thanks to all who contributed tothis and previous issues.

The whiteboardFred Duncan & Mark Wapstra, editors, FPN

to page 2photo: John Hickeyphoto: John Hickey

c-grove

Typewritten Text

Trim 2010/129402

2Forest Practices News vol 4 no 3

NoticeboardForward Training Program – Forest Practices Board

Course (Contact) Timing Duration Location Course ContentForest Botany Manuals(Fred Duncan/Mark Wapstra)

To beconfirmed

1 day Various locations Train FPOs in use of the new BotanyManuals.

Fauna field days(Sarah Munks)

mid 2002 1 day Various General information days onparticular fauna issues

Forest Practices Officerrefresher course(Chris Mitchell)

May to July2002

2 days Twice each inBurnie,Launceston andHobart

Update existing FPOs on changes toforest practices system.

Forest PracticesManager training(Chris Mitchell)

Winter 2002 1 day To be confirmed Update forest managers onrequirements of the forest practicessystem.

Forest Practices Officercourse (Chris Mitchell)

Winter 2002 12 day Various Pre-requisite course for appointmentas FPO.

Forest practicestraining forsupervisors (ChrisMitchell/NatashaBeveridge1)

Spring 2002 4 day To be confirmed General training in forest practicesfor FT and other supervisors.

Fauna values andforest management(Sarah Munks)

28-30 Oct.2002

3 days NE Tas. Train FPOs in procedures forthreatened species.

1Natasha Beveridge, Forestry Tasmania, phone 62337483. Course run jointly by FT and FPB.

He guided the Board through itsevolution to an independent bodyin 1999, retiring as Chair in late2001.

Ken’s professional interest hasalways been in matters of publicpolicy and broad land use. He hasalways been more interested inoutcomes rather than process. As aresult, he abhors the ponderousnature of government and the lackof informed public debate on publicpolicy. He reflects that “publicdebate” is essentiallyentertainment by the media, whichis not conducive to delivering good

outcomes. Despite this, Kenstrongly believes that good peoplecan be relied upon to deliver goodoutcomes. As a manager, hebelieved in having the right peoplein the right places at the right time.With this in mind, he stresses thatthe great success of the forestpractices system lies in its people,especially the Forest PracticesOfficers and FPB specialists.Generations of graduating FPOswill recall Ken’s guiding wordsabout responsibility, honour andchallenge!

Ken always managed to survivethe entrapment of office life by

constant escapes on bush-walkingtrips. Over the years he has acquiredan intimate knowledge ofTasmania’s bush, peaks andcrannies. Retirement from office lifehas allowed Ken to indulge his fulltime passion for bush walking andtravel. However, I suspect that bythe light of a head torch in acampsite somewhere on a remotebluff in the wilds of Tasmania, thelatest draft natural resourcemanagement strategy is being giventhe Ken Felton ‘red pen review’.

from front page

author contact 03 6233 [email protected]

Contributors Guidelines for contributorsForest Practices News is published quarterly by the Forest Practices Board,Tasmania. FPN provides a means for communicating new ideas anddevelopments among those interested in the sustainable management ofTasmania’s forests. We particularly welcome contributions from practisingFPOs. We welcome both feature articles and shorter contributions of evenjust a paragraph or two. Please include illustrations with your contributionsif at all possible. Contributions can be supplied either as hard copy orelectronically. If forwarding material electronically, the address [email protected]. Please ensure that figs/pics are sent as separate filesand not embedded in Word documents. We look forward to seeing you inprint in FPN!

Nathan Duhig

Fred Duncan

Rolan Eberhard

Denise Gaughwin

Angela Iliopoulos

Kevin Kiernan

Chris Mitchell

Sarah Munks

Bernard Plumpton

Karen Richards

Michael Schofield

Mark Wapstra

Graham Wilkinson

Suzette Wood


FloraSpecial Management Zone (Orchid)

Angela Iliopoulos, Forest Planner, Derwent District (Forestry Tasmania)

Late last year a site with two threatened species of orchids (the sky-blue sun orchid Thelymitra jonesii and thetapered leek orchid Prasophyllum apoxychilum) was identified in the Pirates Road area on the Tasman Peninsulaby Tasmanian orchid specialists Hans and Annie Wapstra, and orchid taxonomist Jeffrey Jeanes from RoyalBotanic Gardens, Melbourne.

T. jonesii and P. apoxychilum arelisted as Endangered on theTasmanian Threatened SpeciesProtection Act 1995. P. apoxychilumis also listed as CriticallyEndangered on the CommonwealthEnvironment Protection andBiodiversity Conservation Act 1999.T. jonesii is endemic to Tasmania,and is currently in the process ofbeing listed as criticallyendangered underCommonwealth legislation.

The importance of the Pirates Roadsite for orchid conservation isperhaps best highlighted by thesecomments from Hans Wapstra:

“T. jonesii is the most significantspecies on the site. It is aTasmanian endemic. It has beenrecorded once (1984) fromEaglehawk Neck but has not beenfound here since, despitenumerous searches by many

orchid enthusiasts andspecialists, until 2000when about 6 plantswere found closetogether betweenMason Point andTaranna. There is aspecimen known fromSouthport Bluff (1976)but no fresh specimenshave been recordedfrom that area since.Records from CapeBarren Island date back

to 1973 and it isnot known if thecolony still exists.A site recorded inthe 1990s atSisters Beachnow has a houseon it. Unlikecommon andw i d e s p r e a dspecies withbroad habitatpreferences, likefor instance thespotted sun orchid, therarer sun orchids aretypically very restricted indistribution, usuallyrestricted to a loose colonyon a small site, and usuallywith just half a dozenplants or fewer. The newPirates Road site is unique

for such a rare species in that ithas at least 32 plants. It is thusthe most critical site for T. jonesii.”

The site is in an area of the TarannaState Forest that has steep slopesand changing soils in shortdistances. The site has deep doleriteloams and is rocky with doleriteoutcrops. The associatedunderstorey species includeLomatia tinctoria, Diplarrena moraea,

Helichrysum scorpioides, Stackhousiamonogyna, Pimelea humilis, Goodenialanata, Lomandra longifolia, Boroniaparviflora and Hypoxis spp. Otherorchids that are present includePrasophyllum elatum, Prasophyllumconcinnum (formerly listed as Rareon the Tasmanian ThreatenedSpecies Protection Act 1995), Microtisunifolia and Caladenia echidnachila.Further upslope however, there isa distinct change in vegetation withbracken dominating theunderstorey, sandy soils and noorchids present. It should also benoted that the area was burnt in thewildfires of the 2000/01 summer.FPB specialists suggested that aSpecial Management Zone becreated for the site. A number of

Site map showing the Special Management Zone(Flora) on State forest established to protect andmanage sites of special conservationsignificance for threatened orchids (dotted line).

Thelymitra jonesii (sky-blue sun orchid)Photo: Hans & Annie Wapstra


Floramanagement issues wereidentified; in particular, any futureconversion to plantation, furtherroad or track construction, andtiming of any fire management. Itshould be said that the likelihoodof plantation conversion of this areais very unlikely. The site is notcurrently couped up and it isunlikely that any operations willoccur, except for track maintenanceor fuel reduction practices. Advicefrom orchid specialists indicatedthat normal fire managementpractices would maintain andbenefit the orchids present, andthat high fire frequencies due to amixture of prescribed burns withthe occasional unplanned wildfireare probably ideal.The area has been updated into thecurrent GIS system and a Flora SMZhas been put in place, thus flaggingthe area and allowing appropriatemeasures and processes to beundertaken when planning anyfuture work that may disturb thesite.

The above recommendation thathas been implemented should havethe desired outcome for themanagement of this species. I’msure we will be kept up to date ifthere are any more findings ofwonderful rare and endangeredflora.author contact 03 6233 [email protected] article about the management ofa highly significant site for floraconservation is very encouraging. Thesupport of Angela and Karen fromDerwent District in establishing theSMZ is greatly appreciated. A greatachievement for conservation with verylittle effort and resources! Colourimages of the species discussed abovecan be found in The Orchids ofTasmania by Jones, Wapstra, Tonelliand Harris (but look under Thelymitraazurea for Thelymitra jonesii becausethe taxonomists have been busy andrecently described Tasmanianrepresentatives of T. azurea as T.jonesii).Mark Wapstra, Scientific Officer(Botany), Forest Practices Board.

Prasophyllum apoxychilum(tapered leek orchid)

Photo: Hans & Annie Wapstra

Book reviewThis is the second (we hope) of many book reviews in FPNews. We welcome reviews on books/articles on forestry-related

subjects, particularly those of relevance to forest practices planning.

The Orchids of TasmaniaDavid Jones, Hans Wapstra, Peter Tonelli and Stephen Harris

(Melbourne University Press, 1999 – available at most book retailers)Reviewed by Mark Wapstra

Tasmania is home to over 195 species of native orchids, a substantial component of our native vascular flora. Manyof our orchid species are threatened and while most such species occur in equally threatened habitats (e.g.grasslands, grassy woodlands and coastal heathlands), several also occur in the forested landscape (see articlethis issue) and may be encountered by FPOs.

This book has been designed for a wide audience from the botanical expert, the knowledgable naturalist to theinterested novice. Its outstanding feature is undoubtedly the each species to a page layout with exceptional colourphotographs of each species, distribution maps, detailed scientific descriptions, pointers to instant recognitionof each species, and notes on taxonomy, distribution, habitat, flowering time and response to disturbance.Scientific keys are included to genera and species with an innovative leaf key for identifying non-flowering plants.With a comprehensive glossary and index, and well written sections on orchid conservation, habitats, studies,anatomy and reproduction, this book is an extremely thorough account of Tasmanian orchids.

This is an outstanding publication that will stand the test of time (but perhaps not the test of taxonomy!). Orchidsare often overlooked despite their spectacular flowers but with more eyes in the bush familiar with these delightfulplants, perhaps more species will be discovered (since the publication of the book in 1999, several new specieshave been described for Tasmania), or gaps in our often poor knowledge filled (recently, an astute forest plannerfrom Derwent District alerted me to the eighth known site for the endangered Snug greenhood Pterostylis atriolain the Wielangta State forest). This book would be a useful addition to any District/company plant identificationlibrary.


FeatureFox, Fauna, Forestry ... Future?

Michael Schofield, Forest Practices Officer, Gunns Forest Products

IntroductionIn 1985 I was fortunate to visit Tasmania. The place had immediate appeal. In part, the attraction was theabundance of wildlife, particularly small to medium sized marsupials. At Mount Field National Park I sawa spotted-tailed quoll near the entrance to the walkway for Russell Falls, numerous eastern quolls and easternbarred bandicoots out on the lawn.

There were long-nosed potoroosand southern brown bandicootson the Tasman Peninsula.Tasmanian pademelons andBennett’s wallaby wereeverywhere. Why was I seeing thesesmall to medium sized marsupials,a sight I had not seen back home onthe central north coast of NewSouth Wales? Surely there wassimilar habitat for such marsupialsthroughout this mainland region,particularly in the large expanse of“protected” areas. The simpleanswer is that Tasmania was foxfree and the mainland is not.Although foxes can’t be blamedentirely for the extinction or severereduction of small to medium sizedmarsupials on the mainland theyhave contributed significantly tospecies decline. A whole range ofother factors including habitatdestruction, fragmentation andother feral animals such as cats,rabbits and dogs havecompounded the problem. Manyof these factors however are also atplay in Tasmania and yet there is apresence and abundance of thesesmall to medium sized marsupialsand many ground dwelling birds.The difference is the fox.

If Tasmania goes from fox free tofox full a number of small tomedium sized marsupials andground dwelling birds will becomeextinct, or at least reduced toexceedingly low population size.Apart from the obviousimplications in terms of the loss ofspecies I feel that there will be asignificant impact on forestry.

Counting the Cost1. Biodiversity

Quolls, bettongs, bandicoots,potoroos and pademelons and acouple of species of grounddwelling birds represent just thetip of the iceberg in terms of speciesdiversity in the forest. A fox fullTasmania would still have velvetworms, stag beetles, keeled snails,ptunarra brown butterflies, (not tomention fish, frogs, reptiles etc.),which make up the majority of thefaunal diversity in the forest.However, a fox full Tasmaniawould significantly impact onsmall to medium sized marsupialsand ground dwelling birds to apoint where their existence wouldbe threatened. Species such as theeastern quoll, Tasmanian bettongand Tasmanian pademelon had a

wide distribution on the Australianmainland in historical times butare now confined to Tasmania.Tasmania is also considered thestronghold for species includingthe spotted-tailed quoll, southernbrown bandicoot, eastern barredbandicoot, long-nosed potoroo andbirds such as the ground parrot.This presence and abundance ofsmall to medium sized marsupialsand ground dwelling birds inTasmania is consistent with thepresence of similar species on foxfree islands elsewhere in Australia(e.g. Barrow, Dorre, Bernier,Melville, Kangaroo, Franklin,French Island).Apart from this loss of species therecould be an impact on other speciesand possibly the health of theforests. Bettongs, bandicoots,potoroos have co-evolved with oureucalypt forests and there arebenefits to having these little earthand nutrient movers in the forests.

2. Forest Practices Plans (day today planning)

If Tasmania is to become fox full thejob of the forester and otherenvironmental managers willpotentially be made even harder.Why? To demonstrate this pointI’ll document below two casestudies detailing the steps takenand the costs involved in whentaking fauna (with specificreference to spotted-tailed quolls)into account while drawing up aForest Practices Plan for a coupe inTasmania and a coupe in NSW. Iuse NSW as the comparison as I ammore familiar with forestry in thisState. However many of the issues,costs and difficulties relating towildlife management andEastern barred bandicoot. Photo: Courtesy Dave Watts.


Feature

Introduction

An ever growing number of landowners, land managers and community groups are actively conserving and managingareas of native vegetation and threatened fauna and flora habitat across Tasmania, King Island and the Furneaux Group.In recognition of this stakeholder demand, and the need to sustainably manage Australia’s natural resources and uniqueenvironment, the Commonwealth Government funded the National Bushcare Program through the Natural Heritage Trustin 1997. In broad terms, the Program aims to reverse the long-term decline of Australia’s native vegetation and biologicaldiversity.

The Bushcare Program, also known asthe National Vegetation Initiative, hasthe primary objective of reversing thelong-term decline in the extent andquality of Australia’s native vegetationcover. It aims to achieve this byconserving native vegetation andbiological diversity and restoring nativevegetation and improving degradedproductive systems through strategicrevegetation works. The Programfunds a diversity of projects acrossAustralia to achieve its objectives andis supported in each State and Territoryby a team of extension staff. InTasmania, the extension team isfunded under the Bushcare Extensionfor Tasmania project which has therole of assisting with theimplementation of the BushcareProgram in Tasmania, and to facilitatecommunity and technical extension toBushcare Program funded projects.

Who and what is Bushcare Extensionfor Tasmania?

The Bushcare Extension for Tasmaniaproject helps implement the BushcareProgram through the provision ofregionally based extension officers.The project, overseen by Ian Marmion(State Bushcare Coordinator) andRichard Barnes (Bushcare TechnicalCoordinator) within the Dept. ofPrimary Industries Water andEnvironment, consists of two groups;Community Officers and TechnicalOfficers.

Bushcare Community Officers areregionally based, often in non-Government organisations, and areusually the first point of contact forlandowners and community groupsinterested in protecting and managingnative vegetation, or joining the Landfor Wildlife program (see below).

Bushcare Technical Officers are trainedbotanists and zoologists who provide

geographic zone (e.g. a catchment ormunicipality boundary) and areprincipally funded to assist with on-ground works, for example the controlof non-native plants in bush areas,fencing to manage stock access tonative vegetation and off-streamwatering points. Landowners canapproach DG project staff directly ifthey wish. Bushcare Officers can becontacted for information on whichDG projects operate within your region,or you can contact the Natural HeritageTrust Unit in Hobart for a complete list.

Referrals for covenants ormanagement agreements

Landowners who express an interestin a covenant or long-termmanagement agreement on theirproperty (or part) during or after aBushcare survey are directly referredto the Private Forest Reserves Program(see FPN vol 3 no 2) or the ProtectedAreas on Private Land Program byBushcare Officers. Bushcare Officershave already referred 62 properties tothese programs for their consideration.

Tasmanian Bushcare Toolkit

The Tasmanian Bushcare Toolkit,developed by Bushcare and unique forAustralia, brings together practicalmanagement advice and informationon Tasmania’s native vegetation. It isa valuable decision making tool forlandowners, land managers andcommunity groups in appropriatelymanaging natural areas with respectto issues such as weeds, fire regimes,stocking rates and first principles forrevegetation works. The Toolkit isavailable electronically (PDF) on theweb at www.bushcare.tas.gov.au, orcan be purchased for $38.50 (includingpostage & handling and GST). Contactyour local Bushcare Officer for details.Tasmanian Bushcare Website

The Tasmanian Bushcare website isdesigned for people to identify the

conservation experienced in NSWforestry are also present in otherfox full states such as Victoria.

2.1 Tasmanian coupe: WN120A(Woolnorth, NW Tasmania)As a Forest Practices Officer and atrained Fauna Officer the processundertaken when developing a FPPcommences, in my case, withprinting out a rough map of thearea and obtaining information.This information is readilyavailable from sources such asknown listed sites, reviewinghabitat descriptions from the FPBweb site (Threatened FaunaManual), talking to experiencedpersonnel and reviewingadjoining FPPs. In many areasincluding the Woolnorth estatethere are conservation objectivesthat have been developed betweenforesters and specialists (faunaincluded), therefore I would ensurethat the planned forest operation isconsistent with these objectives.Next is the actual field inspectionwhere I‘m looking for specificknown sites and/or reviewinghabitat. I am planning the operationwith the view to considering theimpact on the spotted-tailed quollat the coupe level (1:10,000) andalso at the strategic level (1:100,000Woolnorth estate). Once thevarious types of fauna habitat fromthe coupe have been identified it isonly a matter of using theThreatened Fauna Adviser (TFA)program (a decision supportsystem developed by FPB andThreatened Species Unit zoologistsin collaboration with speciesspecialists) to determine therelevant prescription. Thisprescription for the species togetherwith additional planninginformation is then either endorsedor added to by the FPB zoologistand TSU zoologist. The operationthen commences subject tocompletion of other components ofthe FPP. This whole process isrelatively quick, affordable ($1,000per FPP) and achieves positiveconservation outcomes. There will

be habitat for spotted-tailed quollsin WN120A once harvesting andreforestation has been completedwhich contributes to a network ofretained habitat in Woolnorth as awhole. Furthermore, the system iseasily audited and monitored andthere is a process for refinementand improvement.

2.2 NSW Coupe: NA115A (Eden,SE NSW)There has been a ComprehensiveRegional Assessment andRegional Forest Agreementcompleted for the region in whichthis coupe falls. There is also a longhistory of forest planning andmanagement. As a forest plannerstep one is to become familiar withthe desk top exercise, not unlikeTasmania where you are lookingfor known sites for threatenedfauna and becoming familiar withthe various forest practices/prescriptions. However, unlikeTasmania in NSW there is no FPBweb site or FPB fauna specialists toassist you. Next step is into thefield. You don’t look for habitatunder the NSW regulations youare looking for species i.e. in thisexample you are looking for anindividual spotted-tailed quoll.Intensive pre-operational surveysinvolving sand traps, hair tubes,active trapping etc. are undertaken.Let’s just say that after all thesurveys your forest ecologist,employed by the industry has notfound the species in NA115A.During step three your draft FPPruns a roller coaster ride (the othername for it is the Integrated ForestryOperation Approval). You’re aftera Threatened Species Licence fromthe NPWS. But first theEnvironmental ProtectionAuthority needs to assess the draftplan, then it goes to the FisheriesDepartment and then finally theNPWS. This takes time (around 6months for an FPP) and it costsmoney (approx. $10,000 per FPP -forest ecologists and fauna surveysaren’t cheap) and what does it tellyou? That you may have a spotted-

tailed quoll in the planned coupebut you did not find it. Or that youdo/did have a spotted-tailed quollin the planned coupe because fourmonths ago when you completedthe survey there was a footprint inthe sand trap. Step four theprescriptions (extremely detailedand complicated) are implementedand the operation goes ahead. Doesthis however deliver a positive,long-term conservation outcomefor the spotted-tailed quoll in thisparticular coupe? Unfortunatelythe answer is no. Actions andprescriptions are largely a reflectionof whether or not the species isproven to be present or not. InTasmania we know that the speciesis present (as they have not yet beenreduced to pathetically lowpopulation sizes) and we managefor habitat and aim to achievepositive, effective, long termconservation outcomes.The differences I have highlightedbetween these two case studies canin part be blamed on the presenceof the fox in NSW. Spotted-tailedquolls are found in very lowpopulations in the south-eastforests of NSW as is the caseelsewhere on the mainland in partdue to competition and predationby foxes. As a result of thesecritically low numbers theresponsibility of planning andmanaging threatened species hasbeen largely taken away fromforesters. In an effort to conservethese species NSW has gone downthe path of what I and others feel isan example of ‘over regulation’.Despite all the time, effort andmoney put into catering for faunain a NSW coupe the outcomes onthe ground do not necessarily leadto any better long-term protectionfor these small to medium sizedmarsupials. In fact in a NSW coupelike NA115A the time shufflingpaper, doing surveys and themoney spent is often in vain.Were foxes to become establishedin Tasmania, and as a resultpopulations of small to medium


Feature

native vegetation on their property byguiding them through a key based onthe characteristics of the tree layer (e.g.are there eucalypts present, is thevegetation treeless). Practical

management optionsare provided for

each nativevegetation

t y p e ,s o m e

rare and threatened species, weedsand revegetation works. The websiteis designed for use by landowners,land managers and technical officers,and provides links to sites related tothe management of native vegetationand habitat, conservation, naturalresource management and sustainableland use practices.

Land for Wildlife

The Land for Wildlife program aims toencourage and assist landowners toconserve and provide habitat forwildlife on their land, even thoughtheir property may also be managedfor other purposes. It also assistslandowners to find solutions tomanagement problems that involvethe protection and enhancement ofwildlife habitat. The program is entirelyvoluntary, free and Bushcare Officersare trained to do property assessmentsfor the program. More information ison the Bushcare website (People andProjects).

How can Forest Practices Officerswork with Bushcare Officers?

Forest Practices Officers for the firsttime now have the option to refer

their clients, with theirpermission, to a

r e g i o n a l l yb a s e dB u s h c a r eOfficer fora s s i s t a n c e

with managingnative vegetation

and fauna habitaton their property.

Assistance may be forareas not affected byharvesting operations(e.g. heathland,grassland or riparianvegetation), areasexcluded from

harvesting, areas notsuitable for commercial

harvesting and plantationestablishment (e.g. low grade foreston poor soils) or for areas that have

been selectively logged and left toregenerate naturally.

Landowners or land managers whowant information and advice on howto manage, conserve, enhance and/orrestore native vegetation, fauna habitator rare and threatened species on theirproperty can be referred to a BushcareOfficer for possible assistance. Forexample, this may be advice to manageriparian or remnant vegetation, orassistance to obtain funding from aDevolved Grant.

The best minds and adequateresources are required urgently toensure that Tasmania is onceagain fox free.


Michael has raised some of theimportant issues and potential costsfacing the forest industry if the foxbecame established in Tasmania. FPOsand other forestry workers areencouraged to work with the DPIWEofficers involved in tackling thisintroduced species. Thanks to all thosewho have already reported sightings.The following excerpt from thenotesheet produced by DPIWE andthe TFGA may help you with yourobservations and providesinformation on what to do if you see afox. The complete notesheet withpictures can be obtained from the Parksand Wildlife web page and a copy hasbeen e-mailed to all Fauna Officers.Sarah Munks, Senior Zoologist,Forest Practices Board

Working Together for a Fox-Free TasmaniaThe red fox is undeniably one ofthe greatest threats to Tasmania ’swildlife and small stock animals.There are also important humanand animal health issues (e.g.hydatids), huge costs oferadication and protecting stock,future costs of managing wildlifevulnerable to foxes, and potentialdamage to our clean-green image.Clearly, foxes are a communityproblem. It is of the utmostimportance that Tasmanianscooperate in keeping Tasmaniafox-free. Landowners are a vitalpart of Tasmania ’s defence againstfoxes. So far, landowners havebeen extremely helpful in givingreports of what might be evidenceof foxes. The following providessimple information on whatevidence might be of foxes. Some ofthis evidence can be confused withother species and comments onthis follow.

Fox (photo frommainlandAustralia, notTasmania!)Photo: courtesyNick Mooney.

it is fox full.At the end of it all you have all thesemaps with “protected” areas, andthe likelihood of increasing“reserves”, forestry operationsunder extreme scrutiny and beingblamed for species decline. Forestryis already very much a contentiousissue. Were these small to mediumsized marsupials to becomethreatened with extinction, thepublic image or perception offorestry would be further tarnished.The public may not see the fox inthe forest, but people do see thewoodchip pile in Burnie in thesame way as they see the one inEden. To them that would be theproblem and the solution is morereserves, more scrutiny of forestoperations. No doubt forestry hasits short term and long termpermanent impact on many of thesespecies, but in my view it is minorcompared to the impacts resultingfrom a fox full Tasmania.Summary

Foxes are the single biggestland based

environmentalt h r e a tT a s m a n i ahas ever

faced. A foxfree Tasmania

is the lastremaining place

in the world formany small to

medium sizedmarsupials and isconsidered thestronghold for many

others. Were foxes tobecome established in

Tasmania these specieswould become extinct or at theleast reduced to exceedingly

low populations, as has beenthe case on the mainland.

Secondary to this loss of speciesthere will be a significant impacton primary industries includingforestry.

sized marsupials were severelyreduced, possibly threatened withextinction, it is likely that oursystem would end up like NSW inan attempt to conserve the species.Can the forest industry afford this?

3. Loss of Forest ResourceIn the south-eastern NSW forestthere are two species of potoroo -the long-footed potoroo and thelong-nosed potoroo (hopefullypotoroo’s are not too sensitive).Within the range of these speciesthere are large “protected” nationalparks and forest reserves. Inaddition to this, coupes such asNA115A are reforested, onceharvesting is completed. Thereserves look great on GIScoverages but do foxes read GIScoverages? The point is, and

foresters in this area arewell aware of it, is

that it ceases tobe suitable

habitat if


FeatureSightings

Report all likely sightingsimmediately to the FOX HOTLINE,even if you hear about them second-hand. Although most people knowwhat a fox looks like, they varyconsiderably in colour and, undersome circumstances, have beenconfused with possums, cats, dogs,quolls (native cats) and hares.Wildlife experts take all reportsseriously and the identity of peoplemaking reports is kept confidential.Footprints

Marsupials such as Tasmaniandevils have large central pads andvery small toes but foxes, dogs andcats have relatively small centralpads and large toes. Althoughhares ’ prints can be large, they lack

a central pad.Foxes, dogs andcats all haveforefeet widerthan theirhindfeet, butthere ared i f f e r e n c e sb e t w e e nspecies. Catprints are small,rounded, neatand their clawsrarely show

while those of foxes and dogs arelarger and more elongate withclaws often showing. Typically, acat places its hindfoot almost whereits front foot on that side was, giving

partially overlayedprints. This is muchless common in foxesor dogs. The hardestprints to tell apart arethose of small dogsand foxes but again,there are differences.The middle toes offoxes are set furtherforward than those of

dogs Foxes have long, high-set,moveable claws meaning theyremain sharp, unlike dogs whichare fixed and constantly wear.Therefore, fox claws might not beseen on hard soil or be deep andsharp in soft soil. These claws makefoxes excellent climbers. Foxes havevery flexible toes. Forefoot prints inparticular tend to showconsiderable variation, unlike dogprints which are all much the same.The pads of foxes are hard edgedand neat whereas those of dogsalways seem a little rounded andpudgy. Unlike dogs foxes havemuch hair between the toes.Therefore the pad imprints canseem further apart than is usual fordogs and often there is a neat littlepyramid of soil left in the middle ofa fox print. In fine mud or clay thehair between the toes of foxes canalso be seen. The bottom of dog footpads are gently rounded whilethose of foxes are sharply ridged.In particular, the central pad of foxfeet have a sharp edge across the

back usually giving a deep,clear triangular shape. Thisespecially applies to the hindfoot. The middle two toes ofthe hind foot of foxes are setwell forward and are almostalways parallel since theyare partially joined.Scats (Droppings)Fox scats are usually aboutthe size of an adult human ’sfinger, roughly cylindricalwith a sharply pointed (asdistinct from tapered)end.Unfortunately fox scats aresimilar to those of cats, largequolls, juvenile Tasmanian

devils and small dogs. Cat scatsare usually tightly formed inseveral rounded sections whilequoll droppings are usuallysticky. Foxes, cats and quolls oftendrop scats on top of tussockswhereas dogs rarely do and devilsdo not. The contents of scatsreflect what was eaten as much aswhat animal produced them.Devil scats usually containrelatively large chunks of boneand are often dropped at latrines(traditional places)and dog scatsusually show evidence ofprocessed food. Blackberries area favourite food of foxes and inseason can be predominant inscats. Animals usually swallowsome of their own hair whengrooming so close analysis ofscats can often tell what animalmade them but leave that to theexperts. Fox scats have a distinct,pungent odour since they areoften used to mark sites. Typically,foxes drop a scat at a feeding orcache site, even on top of a carcasebut quolls sometimes also do this.If you find what you think mightbe a fox scat it is best first examinedin place by wildlife experts. If it isat immediate risk put it into aclean jar or wrap it in aluminiumfoil then bag it or place it in aclean paper bag. Do not squash it.Label it carefully with where itcame from and when and contactthe FOX HOTLINE.Do not touch droppings with yourskin because they may containdisease and you may alsocompromise the analysis.

24 hour FOX HOTLINE1300 FOX OUT

(which is 1300 369 688)


Cultural HeritageReport on visit to USA April 2001Denise Gaughwin, Senior Archaeologist, Forest Practices Board

I travelled to the USA in April last year in order to gain an understanding of the US Forest Service volunteercultural heritage programme, to attend the Forest History/Environmental History conference and to undertakefield inspections with USDA Forest Service archaeologists in Mendocino National Forest.

The Passport in Time (PIT) is avolunteer archaeology and historicpreservation programme of theUSDA Forest Service. Volunteers areinvited to work with professionalarchaeologists and historians onprojects that are real ongoing researchand management projects for whichthe US Forest Service is responsibleon national forests, grasslands andprairies. The goal of PIT is to preservethe nation’s past with the help of thepublic.The programme is fully funded bythe US Forest Service. Volunteers payno fees to participate but areresponsible for their own transport,food and accommodation. A full timecoordinator is employed by the ForestService to ensure the quality andvalue of the projects proposed. Thefirst priority of the program must beto provide education and resourceawareness to the volunteers ratherthan to complete a project. Eachproject must not have tight deadlinesas the volunteers may not be able tocomplete the project i.e. it should notbe a mitigation project that requiresa quick outcome. Every project mustbe supervised by a Forest Servicearchaeologist or historian who mustmaintain a Forest Service presenceat all times. Each PIT leader isresponsible for their project.Examples of projects indicate a widevariety of activities in centres across

the USA. Archaeologicalexcavations are well represented inthe 130 separate projects listed in the2001 catalogue. A popular activityappears to be the restoration of ForestService ranger stations, fire lookouttowers and other structures. Siteinventory surveys, historicsawmilling and mining siterecording and even a boat restorationare available activities for thevolunteers this year. For the lessphysically able there are projectsarchiving records or sorting findsfrom previous archaeological work.The volunteers come from all walksof life but there are some clear patternsevolving of their likely profile. Manyof the volunteers are retired. Therecreational vehicle (RV) is extremelypopular with retired Americans.Owners of these will often follow theweather across and up and downthe country in an attempt to avoidthe worst of the northern winter.Many projects are designed in Statessuch as Arizona to cater to thesevolunteers. With financialindependence this group makes upthe largest proportion of regular,repeat volunteers. Teachers fromSecondary and Elementary schoolsare the next biggest group. Withlonger vacations than most they havethe time and interest to take part inthe program. Often families willparticipate as a group on a project(children under 18 cannot

participate without anaccompanying adult). The attractionfor these groups is being involved inheritage management, theopportunity to visit/live in remotelocations and satisfaction inspending time in a worthwhileproject as well as learning new skillsand understanding.The program has been growing sinceits inception in 1989. Over 13,000volunteers have contributed 218person years into the program. Over2000 volunteers a year nowcompletes a project with manyprojects oversubscribed. Manyvolunteers repeat the experience andall are issued with passports inwhich a record of their achievementsis stamped.The programme is very good publicrelations for the US Forest Service.As the co-ordinator, Jill Osborn, states“ … the volunteers become advocatesfor the Forest Service. In their ownwords this program demonstratesthe Government is working for andwith the people and come away witha greater appreciation of the ForestService and the difficult job that itdoes”. She further outlines theresearch and management value ofthe program “PIT volunteers havehelped us locate, evaluate, restoreand interpret resources that wewould not otherwise have had thetime or money to take care of”. Thevolunteers get a unique experienceas they contribute to research andmanagement on public lands. Thisis seen to contribute to the ongoingdemands of the public to be moreinvolved in public landmanagement. On a well-run projectother resource specialists willprovide teaching sessions on theirwork that broaden theunderstanding of forestmanagement for the volunteers.USDA Forest Service Archaeologists Greg Greenway and Ken Wilson,

Leaf Hillman, Director of Natural Resources and Environmental PolicyKaruk tribe, and Denise Gaughwin.


Field visit: MendocinoNational ForestCaliforniaThree days wereallocated to developingan understanding offorest practices systemsin the USDA ForestService. Archaeologistsat the MendocinoNational forest, GregGreenway and MikeDugas, offered their timeand experience. Thearchaeologist at the SixRivers National Park,Ken Wilson, arranged aliaison visit to the Karuktribe in order to provideinsights into the role ofindigenous stakeholdersin US forest.The Karuk tribe are aFederally recognisedtribe. They are based onthe Upper Klamath Riverof California. Bothhistorically andcurrently salmon fishing has beenthe mainstay of the tribe. They areseen to be the caretakers ofapproximately 65 miles of river.Treaties made with the tribe specifiedthe retention of fishing rights. Thisaction saved the tribe their landswhen taxes had to be paid onreservation land early in the 20thcentury. Whereas many tribes didnot have an income to pay the land

taxes and therefore forfeited theirland the Karuk and someneighbouring tribes were able to payfrom the sale of the salmon. Themembers of the tribe today are proudthat they have retained parts of theirlands and some knowledge of thetraditional ceremonies, many ofwhich relate to the salmon fishing.The best known ceremony todayappears to be the White deer

ceremony. The topics on the agendaat the meeting at the Tribal officeswith Leaf Hillman, Director ofNatural Resources andEnvironmental Policy for the tribeconcerned a known ceremonial trailcalled the Priest trail which is part ofthe White deer ceremony. A roadwidening was to be completed on aforestry road that would sever morecompletely the sacred trail andnegotiations on how to achieve areasonable compromise wereundertaken. Other issues involvedaccess to the Blue Valley where theceremony took place. The ForestService is concerned about the spreadof root rot on the White pine of thearea.The Karuk are involved in the PITprogramme described above. Theyrun the most popular project in theUS. The volunteers alwaysoversubscribe it. We met with theorganisers from the tribe, Laverneand Sonny. They think the success ofthe project is the range of culturalexperiences they offer. These arefocussed around making atraditional basket. Volunteers campwith members of the tribe and collectthe basket materials from the forestand are instructed in theirmanufacture. They prepare an areafor the autumn burning of the beargrass, eat local foods prepared by thetribe, and are involved in story telling,singing drumming and dance.Numbers of places are now reservedfor government officials.Overall it appears that theindigenous population are notcommonly involved in managingtheir heritage in the forests. Only theFederally recognised tribes must beconsulted as part of normal practice.There are very few areas that havethese tribes, most have descendantsthat have been removed manygenerations past and cannot claimto have involvement. It appears to bethat the cultural heritage is firmly inthe hands of the professionalarchaeologists. Some individualarchaeologists make greater effort toconsult than others.In the Mendocino National forest at Black Rock shelter near Mill Creek

with Mike Dugas and Greg Greenway. to page 11

Cultural Heritage

Typical Native American village site on theMill Creek.


FaunaSearching for eagle nests by aerial and ground methods

Bernard Plumpton, Forest Planner, Forestry Tasmania (Derwent District)Pre-operational searching of coupes for eagle nests is now a standard procedure in the preparation of mostForest Practices Plans. Forestry Tasmania’s Derwent District has had extensive experience in aerial and groundbased searching for nests. In the past 18 months more than 110 planned coupes and several major road lineshave been searched with 13 new nests being found.

It is estimated that approximately7400 hectares have been searchedover this period and it has becomeapparent that aerial searchingusing a helicopter is the mostpractical and cost effective method.Derwent District is one of ForestryTasmania’s largest districtscovering all of the east coast southof Bicheno to the Tasman Peninsula,up the Derwent Valley to LakeGordon and all of the CentralHighlands as far north as GreatLake. The range of forest types overthis area is great, but it is the wetsclerophyll and rainforestunderstorey that presents the mostdifficult habitat to search. A total of79 coupes have been aeriallysearched for eagle nests includingassociated roading and two majorroadlines. These coupes weresearched in 4 days requiring 27hours of helicopter flying time. Thismethod has been used in preferenceto ground searching for a numberof reasons:

• A large number of areas can besearched in a short amount oftime. On average, aerial searchingwill cover 3 coupes per hour.This compares to an average of 1coupe per day for groundsearching. With an organisedapproach, a flight plan can beplotted out and the amount of

ferrying time minimised. Allsearch areas are checked withthe FPB Senior Zoologist or theDPIWE raptor specialist prior tosearching to determine whatpotential habitat should besearched.

Wedge-tailed eagle on nest. Photo: Nick Mooney.

In order to understand how thesystem works on the ground I wasshown a number of knownarchaeological sites in the Mill Creekat and near Black Rock. We visited arock shelter on the side of Black Rockthat was amongst the best preservedsites in northern California. Piecesof cordage, basket weaves, deer bone,acorns and the like were found alongwith the usual stone tools. The sitehas been excavated and further workon the site is possible. On the oakwoodland river flats a large numberof village sites are known and somehave had archaeological excavation.These were visible as hutdepressions, stone alignments andartefact scatters. These weresignificant villages of upwards of100 people with an economy based

around salmon fishing and acornprocessing. The area is thought to bedeserted in the summer whentemperatures soar to 100 degreesFahrenheit. The area wasdepopulated starting from theoutbreak of malaria in 1832-3. Thefinal occupation of the area byindigenous tribes was marked bywarfare whereby the settlersundertook to remove the people fromtheir lands. We visited a knownmassacre site on the Mill Creek wherethe people had been set upon in adawn raid and no survivors of theattack were known. It was a verydepressing place to visit.Interestingly the archaeologistswould consider an excavation of thesite. This would be a highly unlikelyscenario in Tasmania andunderscored the relative positions

from page 10

to page 12

of the indigenous peoples and theirrights.Given that timber harvesting hasalmost ceased in these forests themain focus is on research. The PITprogram assists in providing labourfor archaeological investigations.The project for this summer season isan excavation at Poison Glade inconjunction with the Pasenta Bandof the Nomlaki Indians, the Bureauof Land Management and theCalifornia State University, Chico.Greater understanding of theadaptive strategies and the socialdivisions in the tribe are the researchaims of the project. The advantage ofthis interagency approach is that itensures completion of the projectthrough to report production.author contact 03 6336 [email protected]


• Difficult terrain tends to precludethe use of ground searching inmany areas. Dense forest in areassuch as the Styx Forest Block withhorizontal and baueraunderstorey create a difficultenvironment to walk in andobscure the view of the canopy.Difficult ground conditions areirrelevant when searching fromthe air.

• Potential habitat can be quicklyviewed from the air and anassessment made of where thesearching should beconcentrated. Any areas of poorpotential (regrowth or non forest)can be excluded from the searcharea. Areas of potential habitatthat were not initially found inthe mapping exercise can also bespotted and inspected.

The cost of aerially searching fornests in the past 18 months isestimated to be $4.50 per hectarewith approximately 6100 hectaressearched. Nine new nests havebeen found by aerial searching.Reserves have been designedaround each nest andprescriptions designed for theharvesting of the remaining area.A number of searches revealed“possible nests” that requiredfurther ground checking. Thesefeatures were collections ofbranches and debris in the forks oftrees that could not be conclusivelycalled a nest from the air. Groundverification of these featuresrevealed that they were not nests.Notification for each search wasalso sent to the Forest PracticesBoard.During our aerial searching wehave found a number of proceduresthat have improved our searchprogram that may be useful toothers:1. Organise the search well before

the search day. Ensure thatferrying time is minimised byplotting out the search areas ona large scale map and seeingwhat is the shortest ferrying

route from coupe to coupe.Include any refuelling pointsand organise the fuel to be there.

2. Use a GPS. Search areas can bestored in the GPS as way pointswhich reduces the chance ofgetting lost or not being able tofind the coupe. The GPS can alsobe used to plot the flight pathand give an indication of howmuch area has been searchedand provide an accuratelocation if a new nest is found.

3. Check the weather forecast forthe search day. Clear skies andno wind are preferable. Even asmall amount of wind will affectthe minimum speed thehelicopter can travel andtherefore the speed andefficiency of the search.

4. Have the search area mapschecked by a specialist. The FPBzoologists or DPIWE raptorspecialist will assist in pickingout the most suitable habitat andwhere searching should beconcentrated.

5. Keep good records of what hasbeen searched so a detailed mapcan be included in the searchrecord to be sent to the ForestPractices Board.

Ground searches have beenconducted on approximately 1500hectares within Derwent District.This method has been usedprimarily in the eagle breedingseason. Aerial searching shouldnot be done at this time due to therisk of aggressive birds attackingthe aircraft and the chance thatbirds may abandon an active nest.The major disadvantages withground searching techniques are:• The opportunity cost lost as a

consequence of the need toemploy experienced staff in thistask. While this is not a majordisadvantage in aerialsearching, ground searching hasproven to be more timeconsuming. The slowness ofground searching would require

Faunaan extensive time investment fora large search program.

• Ground searching must be stand-alone work. Ground searchesshould never be combined withother work (Forest PracticesNews, Vol 3, No.1 August 2000).While ground searching canallow the person performing thesearch to do a basicreconnaissance of the area, worksuch as Pre-LoggingAssessments or boundarydemarcation should not be doneat the same time.

• Forest with a mixed or wet forestunderstorey is difficult to search.The nature of the understorey inthese forest types has provendifficult to search resulting inslow progress. In addition, theheight of the understoreygenerally acts to obscure viewingof potential nest sites in thedominant trees. It has also provendifficult based on an average treeheight of between 50 to 80 metresto evaluate possible nest sitesfrom the ground. Dry open forestwith a sparse understorey hasproven the most suitable foresttype for ground searching.

Cost for ground searching inDerwent District averages $7.95per hectare. This includes the costof the FPB and Threatened SpeciesUnit (DPIWE) registered searcher(when used), Forestry Tasmaniastaff and vehicle use. Transportcosts from base to the search areaappears to be one of the greatestcosts when ground searching.Derwent District intend to conductthis season’s search programduring the autumn and it isestimated that 60 to 70 coupes willbe searched. The majority of thesecoupes will be searched using ahelicopter as it is clearly apparentthat this is the cheapest and mostefficient method for searching foreagle nests.



FaunaGreen and gold frog field day a success!

Karen Richards and Suzette Wood, Scientific Officers, Forest Practices Board

The first of the Forest Practices Board’s fauna field days for 2002 was held near Devonport in late January. Thepurpose of the day was to introduce Forest Practices Officers and other interested members of the forest industryto the green and gold frog (Litoria raniformis) and its habitat.A total of 22 people from across thestate attended the day.The morning began with anintroduction to the frog presentedby Raymond Brereton of theThreatened Species Unit, DPIWE.Participants were given adescription of the frog andintroduced to the frog call, if onlythrough a tape recording. All ofthis took place while the groupstood at the side of a picturesquewetland, surrounded by long grass,which people later learned was thehome to a large population ofsnakes!Following a question and answerperiod which centred oninterpreting the Threatened FaunaAdviser prescriptions andunderstanding more about thehabitat requirements for frogbreeding and basking, participantswere invited to wander around thewetlands (a few volunteers donnedwaders and took to the water) tolook for the frogs. Well as itsometimes is with field days, manyfrogs were collected, however thegreen and gold frog remainedelusive. No snakes were seen.

The convoy of white 4WDs andone station wagon then moved onto see further examples of wetlandswith suitable and/or unsuitablefrog habitat. The second wetlandconsisted of two parts: the mainwaterbody was an old quarry filledwith water but containing noaquatic vegetation; to the side ofthis, and under the noses ofparticipants, was a smallerwetland, shallow and containingbulrushes. While Ray wasdescribing the habitat suitabilityof this smaller wetland fortuneshone upon us. A distinct ‘plop’was heard. That ‘plop’ was thesound of a green and gold frog

diving into the water after havingbeen disturbed by a large group ofpeople. Within a few minutes thekeen hunters cornered the frog anda star was born. Everyone got to seethe frog and memento pictureswere taken.The tour continued on to see asmaller, but suitable, wetland.Several people heard frogs divingbut no more were captured. Finally,the group visited a marvellousexample of an unsuitable wetlandfor the green and gold frog. Pointswere made about the lack of aquaticvegetation and stock access to thesite.On the whole the day was a successwith all attendants showing a keeninterest in learning more about thiselusive beast and its habitatpreferences.A final point worth mentioning.Although no snakes were seen, thesame site was visited by a group ofherpetologists from the QueenVictoria Museum and Art Gallerythe following day. A total of 5 largesnakes were found, one weighingin at 2.4 kg.

author contact 03 6233 [email protected] &[email protected]


GeomorphologyNew forest plantation a plus for the Fairview karst

Kevin Kiernan, Senior Geomorphologist, Forest Practices BoardIn various parts of Tasmania karst areas have been cleared of their natural vegetation for pasture expansion.In some cases there is geomorphological evidence of a metre or more of soil having been lost into the karst asa result.This implies not only a loss of soilproductivity, but also changes inwater seepage underground andin water chemistry, implying inturn significant harm to caveenvironments. But forest plantationdevelopment by Gunns Ltd hasnow significantly improvedprospects for the small Fairviewkarst in far northwesternTasmania.The most conspicuous karst in thisarea is formed in some smalldolomite hills that rise above broadalluvial plains that largely maskthe karst beneath them. The area isparticularly interesting for severalreasons. First, the karst is formed intwo different limestone formationsof vastly different ages that occurtogether at this one site. It is formedpartly in very old Precambrian (580million years old) dolomite andpartly by much younger Miocene(less than 30 million years old)limestone deposited when the seacovered this coastal plain, fillingold marine karst features in thedolomite. Second, the dolomite hillshave been eroded by swampwatersthat have undercut their margins,more like tropical “towerkarst”hills than the usual Tasmaniansituation of karst being elaboratedby vertical infiltration of seepageand sinking streams. Third,intricate solution sculpture of rockoutcrops (karren) formed on theyounger Tertiary limestone hereand also on nearby Coffeys Hill(just outside the plantation on aneighbouring property) is quitespectacular and includes somekarren species generally found inthe tropics and either extremelyrare or otherwise unknown fromTasmania. Fourth, the higheroutcrops exhibit true limestonesoils (terra rossa), also generally rare

in Tasmania where most soils inkarst have formed from non-limestone materials brought intothe area by rivers, glaciers etc.The previous landowners werealways very welcoming towardsvisitors interested in the caves, buteven so some farm managementpractices were cause for concernfrom a karst perspective. Previous

pasture development right up tothe hill margins and rough grazingand tree removal from the hillsthemselves has had major impacts.Sediment eroded from adjacentpasture and the hills wascontinually being deposited incaves. Cave names such as GluePot attest to the most obvious and

Entrance to one of the caves at Fairview, photographed at a time whendairy herds drank from a pool inside the cave.

Outcrops and karren on the plain. The horizontal notches indicate formerswamp or stream levels.

to page 15


Geomorphologyaromatic impact of dairy herdsentering caves to drink from theunderground pools, leavingbehind them greatly raised nutrientlevels in the cave waters andcausing eutrophication of hill-margin ponds.Some years ago the property cameonto the market and was initiallyconsidered for purchase byForestry Tasmania for plantationdevelopment, but ultimatelyrejected due to perceivedcomplications involved inmanaging around the karst.However, subsequently Gunns Ltdaccepted the challenge. In layingout the plantation, considerablecare was taken to avoid karstdepressions and particularly thosearound the margins of the dolomitehills that feed water laterally intothe caves.Initial monitoring suggests thatnow cattle are excluded sedimentis no longer being washed into thecaves or being traipsed in by cattle.Water quality is also improving.Natural revegetation on the hillsabove the caves and around areasof karren has covered many groundsurfaces previously bare. Whether

any original invertebrate cavefauna remains in smaller,inaccessible crevices from which itmay be able to recolonise the cavesremains to be seen - as yet, the largeTasmanian cave spider and cavecrickets that are often the mostconspicuous denizens of the darkhave not been recorded. But in themeantime, birds are takingadvantage of the caves for nesting.The situation for any karst areadegraded by deforestation is likelyto be improved by reafforestation.However, plantation developmentwill not always assist becausevigorously-growing plantationsare likely to dehydrate cavesbeneath them, and recurrentharvesting will mean “shockloads” of change that precludeeffective recovery of the naturalkarst system. But in the Fairviewcase, water enters the caves notprimarily from the ground surfaceabove them but by water being shedlaterally into the foot of the hillsfrom the adjacent plains – but inaddition, Gunns did not plant thearea directly over the caves either.The vigorously-growingplantation on the plains may meanless water will flood into the caves,

and the possibility exists that thewater table may be seasonallylowered below the level ofdepressions on the cave floor thatpreviously formed pools whilepasture was present – and perhapsmore so than occurred naturallyprior to land clearing. But thepresent situation is still a vastimprovement over the situationprior to the new forest plantation.These promising results suggestthat with a positive attitude, carefulsite selection and planning,plantation development can aidrehabilitation of some karst settingsdegraded by past land clearing andfarming practices. Whetherplantation development isappropriate is very muchdependent upon specificcircumstances at specific karsts.But these initiatives by Gunns Ltdwill help ensure that the naturalvalues of the Fairview caves willcontinue to complement thespectacular karren here and onnearby Coffeys Hill in providing aremarkable assemblage of unusualkarst landforms.author contact 03 6233 [email protected]

Web sightingsA regular column on sites containing information on forest practices and management. We invite your

suggestions (site address and short summary). The FPB does not necessarily endorse the content of the sites.We will try to maintain a balance of State interstate and international sites.

www.privateforests.tas.gov.auThis site details the function of Private Forests Tasmania and the services it provides. The site provides access tothe Farm Forestry Toolbox, Private Timber Reserve database, the Farm Forestry and Farm Forestry SpeciesInformation Sheets, Plantation Information Sheets, the latest newsletter, and more. There are some useful links toother related sites including the TFGA, DPIWE, Landcare, Greening Australia, the CRC and more.www.ifa.unimelb.edu.auThis is the web site of the Institute of Foresters of Australia (IFA). It has much information on forest managementin Australia including membership information, access to the latest abstracts of the institute journal AustralianForestry, access to the IFA newsletter, a very useful section of abstracts of PhD and Masters theses abstracts onforest management from around Australia, information on the Registered Professional Forester Scheme and muchmore. The site has a comprehensive links page to other forestry sites of interest.www.bushcare.tas.gov.auThis is the web site of the Tasmanian Bushcare program, a program that helps landowners to integrate themanagement of remnant bush into their farm practices. This is a great looking site with excellent detail on theprogramme’s background and philosophy, comprehensive guidelines on various management issues (such as fire,weeds and stock grazing), information on vegetation mapping and other projects and much more. Contactinformation for the programme and related projects is provided, including information on the devolved grantsscheme (which includes projects such as the Fencing Incentive Scheme Tasmania, or FIST, that some FPOs mayhave heard of). The Tasmanian Bushcare Toolkit can be downloaded from the site. See Vol 4 No 1 of FPNews formore information on Bushcare.


GeormorphologyIn kind (sic) support for Mole Creek NHT KarstCare project

This, and many other caves, are being surveyed as part of an NHT funded project, the Mole Creek KarstStrategy, being coordinated by DPIWE’s Nature Conservation Branch with in kind support from the ForestPractices Board. Rat Hole is also a favourite of Kevin Kiernan’s and some of the earliest FPOs may recallthe experience of a midnight trip to this sporting cave located on state forest.

The aim of the project is to produce an integrated management strategy for all land tenures within the MoleCreek karst catchment in northern Tasmania. The strategy will comprise a range of initiatives to promotebetter management of this outstanding karst land. In particular, it will seek to address issues arising fromthe highly fragmented nature of the karst, in terms of tenure and land use practices. Activities such asforestry, limestone quarrying, urban development, agriculture and conservation reserves are being activelypursued within the karst catchment. In this situation there is potential for problems as the land tenureboundaries have been drawn without regard to more rational management units such as catchments. Aspart of the strategy, up to date maps of the karst landforms (including underground landforms such as RatHole), drainage and karst sensitivity will be prepared. It is envisaged that these will be a useful tool for allland managers working in the karst.

The project has linkages with the Meander Valley Natural Resource Management Strategy and Mersey RiverCatchment Strategy. The ‘KarstCare’ approach it is seeking to foster recognises that karst has particularcharacteristics that make it different from other environments, and takes account of these differences inpromoting sustainable land management practices in karst areas. The Steering Committee for this projectincludes representatives from the FPB, FT, PFT, TFGA, PWS, DPIWE, Meander Valley Council and theabove mentioned Meander and Mersey Valley projects.

For further information contact the project officer Rolan Eberhard at DPIWE, GPO Box 44, Hobart 7001, Ph623 3 6455, email [email protected]

Nathan Duhig (left) and Luke Vanzino (DPIWE), emerge filthy but flushed from a surveying trip

to Rat Hole Cave, Mole Creek. Photo by Rolan Eberhard (DPIWE).

forest practices news...update existing fpos on changes to forest practices system. forest practices...

Documents