Ginninderry is a new developing suburb at the west of ACT and close to the boundaries of NSW. According to the Ginninderry report (Ginninderra Catchment Group, 2016), the project aims to sustainably develop the region based on the assessment of social, economic and ecological perspectives.
As the pressure applied on natural environment by rapid population growth has been significantly increasing, the balance between urban development and conserving biodiversity and habitat would be crucial within the developing projects. The Ginninderry project has been following the EPBC Act for conservation of several threatened habitat and species in this region and concurrently invest for a ecologically sustainable community.
Main issues with sustainable development
Clearing of land and previous grazing area results in habitat loss of box-gum woodland and natural grassland. Natural corridors for wildlife within the Ginninderry region have been narrowed down and significantly impacted by urban development.
Noxious weeds in habitat results in reduce of ecological and economic values of land and lack of midstorey vegetation that is competitive against them and provide habitat for birds. Difficulties in the extent of coverage of weeding and planting programs, as well as the high cost of reestablishment and maintenance.
Strategies to address the issues
Offset Management Plan has been proposed and implemented to specify the actions required to offset the developing and residual impacts on threatened habitat. Further sustainable conservation plans following EPBC Act were required with the development of Ginninderry community.
The Weed Management Plan has been implemented and weed surveys were conducted for mapping occurrences of noxious weeds to establish weeding programs across the region. Several weed management methods have been implemented, for example, application of herbicides, mechanical and physical removal of weeds and planting of other vegetation (Butler, 2014).
References
Butler, G., 2014. WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN for PROPOSED RIVERVIEW DEVELOPMENT WEST BELCONNEN, Canberra: Environmental & Horticultural Consultancy.
Ginninderra Catchment Group, 2016. A Preliminary Biodiversity Survey of the Ginninderra Falls Area, Canberra: Ginninderra Catchment Group.
What’s your first reaction to seeing a snake in the wild? Hold on! let me rephrase how you feel about snakes in your backyard!?
In the ACT, various suburbs are surrounded by bushland nature reserves, the perfect habitat for Australia’s Eastern Brown Snake (Pseudonaja Textilis). This proximity between snake habitats and suburban homes encourages Eastern Brown Snakes to explore beyond the safety of their ecosystem and into backyards. This consequently provokes human-wildlife conflicts, resulting in snakebites to humans and pets, and homeowners attacking the species. Understandably, homeowners are not too happy with snakes venturing into their backyards. However, the snakes are also placed in a vulnerable position.
When natural ecosystems coexist within urbanised areas, biodiversity is prone to experiencing human threats, with disruption to the natural function of ecosystems. However, the Eastern Brown Snake has adapted to urban development, and benefits from the sufficient food resources (rodents and lizards) found in suburban homes.
Therefore, the main issue is Eastern Brown Snake prevalence in backyards. It is quite a backwards situation as rather than the humans invading the snake habitat; the Eastern Brown Snake is invading the human habitat! This is placing both humans and snakes at risk.
(Eastern Brown Snake, ACT)
So how can we stop this from happening?
Good question!
Management needs to be implemented to decrease negative interactions between humans and snakes. Well, good news! This is currently being actioned by The Canberra Snake Tracking Project!
The Canberra Snake Tracking Project is led by A/Prof Gavin Smith and is funded by various government organisations. This project is tracking several snakes via radio-telemetry technology, to collect baseline data on the movement ecology and behavioural characteristics of the Eastern Brown Snake. Radio telemetry is a transmission-receiving system, that receives signals from a tag surgically implanted in each of the snakes being tracked, by a wildlife vet.
(Radio telemetry handheld satellite recording transmitter tag signals)
Working in affiliation with the project is the Canberra Snake Catcher service. A free professional snake removal service that captures and relocates snakes from backyards to suitable habitats. A selection of these snakes have been translocated to different habitats for research purposes and are currently being tracked for the project. The movement data collected on these translocated snakes is compared to snakes the project is tracking in their natural habitat. This data regulates survivability rates and habitat suitability, helping to determine the success of translocation as a conservation management strategy.
I was given the opportunity to experience tracking these snakes firsthand, under the guidance of A/Prof Gavin Smith. My experience involved physically tracking the snakes and observing their behaviours, intrinsic attributes, and interactions within their natural ecosystem. This species was incredibly captivating to watch, with each snake demonstrating unique characteristics.
This links to another aim of the Canberra Snake Tracking Project. Helping communities to better understand Eastern Brown Snakes, ultimately improving society’s knowledge and relationship with the species. Providing educational information will have a positive impact on conservation outcomes.
(Eastern Brown Snake, ACT)
What can you do to help?
Volunteer! The Canberra Snake Tracking Project provides the opportunity for volunteers to help with the collection of data. With appropriate guidance and safety training, volunteers can spend time helping to track and monitor the Eastern Brown Snakes, contributing to conservation management. From a personal experience, this species is fascinating to observe in its natural habitat! Oh, and radiotelemetry is also quite fun to use!
These conservation efforts have the capacity to prevent further human-wildlife conflicts. With the success of the project, Eastern Brown Snakes can be protected from the threats of urban development, and humans can reassuringly enjoy time in the comfort of their own backyard.
I was given the opportunity to experience tracking these snakes firsthand, under the guidance of A/Prof Gavin Smith. My experience involved physically tracking the snakes and observing their behaviours, intrinsic attributes, and interactions within their natural ecosystem. This species was incredibly captivating to watch, with each snake demonstrating unique characteristics.
This links to another aim of the Canberra Snake Tracking Project. Helping communities to better understand Eastern Brown Snakes, ultimately improving society’s knowledge and relationship with the species. Providing educational information will have a positive impact on conservation outcomes.
What can you do to help?
Volunteer! The Canberra Snake Tracking Project provides the opportunity for volunteers to help with the collection of data. With appropriate guidance and safety training, volunteers can spend time helping to track and monitor the Eastern Brown Snakes, contributing to conservation management. From a personal experience, this species is fascinating to observe in its natural habitat! Oh, and radiotelemetry is also quite fun to use!
These conservation efforts have the capacity to prevent further human-wildlife conflicts. With the success of the project, Eastern Brown Snakes can be protected from the threats of urban development, and humans can reassuringly enjoy time in the comfort of their own backyard.
It is fairly well known that that many of Australia’s frog species have been rapidly declining over recent decades. There have been multiple causes of this – climate change, habitat destruction and disease just to name a few. In particular, chytrid fungus disease, a disease that was introduced into Australia in the 1970s, has been taking a heavy toll on our frogs ever since. This disease has contributed to the extinction of at least four native species and is threatening many more not just in Australia but world-wide. As a result, we’re looking for ways to mitigate this disease and find methods to support affected frog populations.
So why is this important? Well, much of the current biodiversity work on frogs are mostly focused on high risk of extinction species due to chytrid fungus. While this is fine, there may be potentially much to learn from these frog species that are seemingly coexisting with the disease. Understanding why these frogs are so resilient in the face of a normally deadly disease may unlock potential interventions we can use in order to support other more vulnerable frog species.
Whistling tree frog (Litoria verreauxii) (Source: australian.museum)
Peron’s tree frog (Litoria peronii) that has recently succumbed to chytrid fungus disease (Source: Ken Griffiths/Getty Images)
Pioneering a Potential Management Option
Jordann Crawford-Ash, a PhD student from the ANU is investigating this exact mystery and aims to identify the interactions that the chytrid fungus disease has with the different stages of life of the whistling tree frog. Volunteering to assist them in this endeavour, my work consisted of aiding them in capturing tadpoles from select sites where whistling tree frogs were known to have inhabited. These tadpoles were then swabbed for traces of chytrid fungus and the data collected would be compared to swabbing’s done to frogs of different life stages. Crawford-Ash’s project also aims to collect data on micro-predators in the water which may give us answers to the whistling tree frog’s resilience.
Frogs provide many essential ecological services to humans, such as controlling pest populations for agriculture, reducing spread of disease and pollination just to name a few. The central takeaway from this work I believe is the importance of finding new and more effective management options for biodiversity. With the number and severity of threatened species we have in Australia today, our current methods may not be enough to keep up with the rate of extinction.
An Example: Delma impar habitat in a Yass development
Alongside an ecology surveying company, I assessed a potential development site in Yass (NSW) for the presence of Delma impar (the striped legless lizard). Delma impar is a threatened species in NSW that prefers a critically endangered habitat (on the federal level) – native grassland. It is primarily threatened by degradation and fragmentation of said grassland. The survey was performed to the letter following the survey guidelines of the national recovery plan for this species. One Delma impar individual has been discovered on the site and this has several ramifications for how the development may proceed. This survey was part of an initial Biodiversity Assessment Method (BAM) stage 1 assessment, which can determine if the development proposal triggers the Biodiversity Offset Scheme and therefore requires a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR). In the example of this Yass site it is likely to trigger the scheme as a threatened species is recorded on site and the development would involve a certain level of native vegetation clearing. The hypothetical BDAR would detail steps to avoid and mitigate impact on the striped legless lizard but they also have the option of paying the offset cost instead (although this costs more than mitigation/avoidance). Essentially this means they can pay for the protection of Delma impar habitat elsewhere or they can transfer the money and obligation to do so to the Biodiversity Conservation Trust (BCT).
In theory the BCT would use this money to offset the negative impacts of the Yass development and in keeping with the like-for like rules it would protect Delma impar habitat elsewhere. However a 2022 audit of the Biodiversity Offset scheme by the NSW audit office found some severe failings in how the scheme operates in reality, failings that could impact a species like Delma impar drastically.
The audit found that credit supply is outweighed by demand, there aren’t enough credits to offset the amount of development. The audit discovered that developers have transferred $90 million total to the BCT for offsets yet only 20% of those obligations have been fulfilled. That is a lot of offset debt. There seems to be a particular lack of species credits (that directly offset impact on threatened species) despite a huge impact on species: 96% of developers demand for species credits haven’t been retired.
Implications for species like Delma impar
So even if the ecology surveying company performs their job well and the developers themselves stick to the legislation requirements there is no guarantee that their actions and money actually result in an offset. Species like Delma impar in sites like the Yass development can be impacted and the system doesn’t effectively do what it is supposed to do, offset that impact. Allowing the BCT to hold onto this offset debt essentially without any guarantee that it can or will be paid is great for development but fails to negate the impact of said development on Australia’s biodiversity.
For a threatened species such as Delma impar in a threatened ecosystem these failings are a huge concern for their survival, their habitat can be impacted and ultimately destroyed without any guarantee of reparation.
The 2022 audit found that the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) of NSW lacks a strategy to solve this credit supply shortage. Recently however the NSW government produced the Biodiversity Credits Supply Fund and task force, with $107 million at there disposal and the aim to seek out credit properties and expediate the process of creating credits. Perhaps this could be a solution, hopefully the fund and taskforce can meet the offset demands of development past present and future.
The simplistic view that a niche remains vacant and with fixed borders following a species’ extinction is hopelessly naive. Nature abhors a vacuum, and any returning species has to fight to develop its own new niche. How can we predict what this niche will be?
Mark R. Stanley Price
The bird of the hour: The Bush Stone-Curlew
Once widespead, the Bush Stone-Curlew (Burhinus grallarius) went extinct in the Canberra region during the 1970’s. Threats from predation, mainly foxes, and habitat loss, due to clearing, have caused diminishing population numbers across the country causing classifications of endangered in New South Wales, threatened in Victoria, and rare in South Australia. Attempts conserve the species have led to curlew reintroductions, to mainly fox-free environments, at Phillip Island, Kangaroo Island, and Mt Rothwell Biodiversity Centre, among others.
What actually is reintroduction conservation?
The IUCN defines reintroduction as the release of an organism into an area that was once part of its range but from which it has been extirpated. With relatively little scientific literature until the 1990‘s, reintroduction and translocation of endangered species is becoming an increasingly successful conservation strategy. The IUCN Guidelines for Re-introductions places emphasis on the identification of reintroduction sites that are within the historic range of the species and the acknowledgement of the previous causes of decline with clear ways of addressing them.
I spy …
Volunteering for the lovely Sho Rapley’s PhD research on Bush Stone-Curlew reintroduction, I helped conduct a population survey at Mulligan’s Flat Woodland Sanctuary (MFWS). The unique 1253 ha of wildlife habitat enclosed by a 23km predator-proof fence is the secret to the curlews’ survival. First reintroduced to the predator-free sanctuary in 2014, with a total of 6 group releases to date. The reintroduction of the curlew to MFWS historically marked the return of the species to the ACT.
The survey we completed aimed to establish an estimate of the curlew population within the Sanctuary. Due to Covid lockdowns, population surveys weren’t able to be completed during previous years.
Image 1: Avenza Maps screenshot of MFWS polygon #9. The orange line shows our survey path .
Splitting into groups and pairs, we were each assigned a polygon in the Sanctuary. Navigation during the survey was facilitated using Avenza Maps, an app that tracked our movement within the polygon (Image 1). Throughout the survey, any observed curlews and overheard curlew calls (distinctive) had to be noted on a census data sheet (Image 2). In ~2.5 hours we heard 2 calls, saw 1 adult curlew in flight, and spotted a mated pair along with their nest and eggs.
Image 2: The survey census datasheet with our results at the end of the survey.
You call that a nest?!?
Sho and I were lucky to spot an un-banded nesting pair. Like the adult bird, Bush Stone-Curlew eggs perfectly blend with the landscape (Image 3).
Image 3: The Bush Stone-Curlew nest with 2 eggs.
Adaptivemanagement
Reintroduction of any species a long a complex process that requires “identifying and assessing relative risks, specifying alternative outcomes in advance with indicators, and following it up [with] adaptively tweaked management.” The continued prosperity of the Bush Stone-Curlew at MFWS speaks to the success of continued adaptive management. The management of the curlews’ reintroduction meets all the IUCN aims: a site within the historic range of the species, addressing the fox threat with a predator-free space, addressing the threat of habitat loss with abundant suitable habitat type, and having ongoing management and monitoring, which in this case involves regular surveys, routine tagging of new individuals, the use of GPS backpacks, and more.
The preservation of endangered fauna and, by extension their ecosystem services, can be effectively achieved with reintroductions. But beware: success hangs on the quality of the monitoring.
On a rainy October day, a group of ANU students went to Gininderry, Canberra with the intention of planting native plants in an urban park, only to get extremely wet. While we didn’t get to do our task, we learnt how biodiversity can be enhanced in urban spaces.
The problem: our cities are expanding
The world population is growing, and so are our cities. However, instead of becoming denser, many cities are expanding; urban area will increase by 1.2 million km2 by 2030. Urban expansion can occur when development is unnecessarily spread out by back yards or parking lots, or when developments are separated by areas of undeveloped land. The extent of expansion influences the size of the city’s environmental footprint.
City expansion is harming biodiversity
Urban environmental footprints include biodiversity loss; on top of the destruction of ecosystems and habitat, urbanisation can lead to habitat fragmentation, where habitat is split into smaller, disconnected areas. The resulting reduced amount and quality of habitat means that urban-adject areas may only support small populations, and the species pool may be homogenized. Genetic drift and reduced gene flow can result from patch isolation and reduced habitat capacity. Fragmentation can also increase edge effects such as degraded soil quality, invasive species, and adverse microclimate conditions. Such impact of urban expansion on biodiversity indicates a need for balancing the demand for development with the need to manage biodiversity loss.
A solution: urban green space (UGS)
Including UGS in cities can help mitigate the impact of urbanisation on biodiversity. Specifically, greater size, quality, and quantity of urban green space can support endemic native species and species of conservation concern, which is enabled by the space’s vegetation. Therefore, the management decisions– including for types of understory, habitat removal, habitat structure simplification, and control measures (eg herbicides)- can determine the biodiversity benefits of UGS. However, given human proximity, such management decisions must balance human needs and expectations with ecological requirements, and therefore planning and management requires significant thought.
A case study of UGS in Ginninderry
Canberra is one area where urbanisation has impacted biodiversity, and has notably resulted in the fragmentation of populations that depend on mature eucalypts. Therefore, UGS, and its management, should be included in urban planning.
In Northern Canberra, the Gininderry housing development uses UGS to minimise the impact of development on the environment. Management activities include retaining mature trees and planting understory, as in image 1. These enhance biodiversity by providing habitat; planting can enhance understory volume and the proportion of native species, which can increase occupancy for many faunae, while mature trees are habitat for many species, as shown in image 2. However, given the young age of the development, the biodiversity benefits from these spaces are not yet clear.
Image 1: An urban green space at Gininderry, containing a mature tree and native understory plantings. (Hebblewhite, 2022)Image 2. The canopy of a mature tree at Ginninderry. There is a hollow in a sawn-off branch, which may be used as bird habitat. (Hebblewhite, 2022)
The project has shown the importance of balancing human interests with ecological goals. Some management options conflict with residents’ expectations; deadwood can provide habitat, but residents harvest it for their personal use. By keeping this balance, conservation can be effective in cities.
Summary
Overall, it was interesting to see how Ginninderry is minimising its impact on biodiversity in a way that is feasible for an urban context, and it will be interesting to see results going forward.
Any Australian is more than aware of the plight of our Koalas- with threats coming from all sides, they are facing an imminent risk of extinction. Across the country, this risk grows with every passing day, with the federal government increasing the conservation status of Koalas in ACT, NSW and QLD from vulnerable to endangered. In September of 2022, however, myself and a number of other ANU students had the opportunity to gain firsthand insight into the inner workings of Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve’s Koala Conservation efforts.
One of the Koalas on display at Tidbinbilla. Source: ABC News
The change in conservation status earlier this year came after an estimated decrease in the wild population of 32,00-58,00 individuals, or 30% of the total population over the last three years. This was a result of a number of significant threats- Chlamydia affects 30-100% of wild Koalas (depending on location) and has devastating effects on their overall health and fertility, and is exacerbated by stress, such as that caused by the habitat loss and fragmentation occurring across their natural habitat due to bushfires, human developments and deforestation. At Tidbinbilla, a 40 acre predator free zone has been established for the Koala population, with a small population of Koalas currently within the enclosure. These koalas are monitored fairly constantly, with thermal imaging drones soon to be deployed over the area to better visualise the population within.
Education and awareness
The current primary goal of the reserve circulates around public awareness and education of the plight of the Koalas- there is significant evidence that environmental education has the capacity to “prepare individuals and communities to collaboratively undertake positive environmental action”. The three koalas in a smaller enclosure towards the front of the reserve act as educational tools, and the regular upkeep of the enclosure as was conducted by our team of volunteers helps to attract the public and allow them to learn more about the koalas and their conservation, while the funds from their entry into the reserve are funnelled back into conservation efforts.
The enclosure of Koalas on display at Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve. Source: WeekendNotes
Breeding programs
The future of Tidbinbilla’s conservation efforts is in breeding programs not unlike Koala tinder. Chlamydia free, healthy Koalas such as those at Tidbinbilla are few and far between- unfortunately, however, the Tidbinbilla koalas are all relatively closely related, so their breeding has no positive impacts on the genetic diversity and therefore conservation of the species. Enter Stud books- records of captive koalas ancestry that allow breeding programs to avoid inbreeding and maintain the highest level of genetic diversity within the population. The eventual upshot of these programs is the production of an insurance population- a healthy, genetically diverse population that can be reintroduced into areas where the population is extinct or defunct, such as the ACT, where wild koalas haven’t been spotted for some decades- eventually, Tidbinbilla will become a member of such breeding programs and allow for a brighter future for the Koalas.
Until recently, Koalas have been facing a fate that was seemingly inevitably doomed. But with the advent of increasingly sophisticated breeding programs and monitoring efforts, it appears there is hope for some of the nations most beloved animals.
For many people, the words ‘biodiversity conservation’ engender images of national parks, reserves, and other protected areas. Collectively, these areas form the ‘National Reserve System’, Australia’s protected area estate. Despite its expansion in recent years, the protected area estate has its flaws. Organisations like Bush Heritage Australia play a critical role in addressing these issues.
National parks like Yuraygir National Park may come to mind when you hear the words ‘biodiversity conservation’ This image is licensed by the State of New South Wales and Department of Planning and Environment for reuse under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence
The protected area estate is biased towards unproductive lands with steep slopes and low soil fertility. Essentially, these are areas that are unsuitable for other, more profitable, uses like agriculture and urban development. As a result, 12.6% of threatened species and ecosystems are unrepresented in the protected estate, while others are severely underrepresented, including temperate grasslands and grassy woodlands.
Private land and connectivity
70-90% of inadequately protected biodiversity occurs on private land. Much of this land contains threatened species, high-quality remnants, and productive areas; that is, areas that are underrepresented in the National Reserve System. Protecting private land is also important to ensure connectivity between protected areas, which is essential for ecosystem processes and the dispersal, migration, and adaptation of species.
Through its management of reserves, Bush Heritage not only protects but also restores degraded lands. In 2006, Bush Heritage strategically acquired Scottsdale Reserve as a key habitat link for Kosciusko to Coast (K2C), a regional-scale conservation project. At the time of acquisition, Scottsdale Reserve was threatened by overgrazing, erosion, fragile soils, and invasive weeds. Bush Heritage has since undertaken several restoration activities including weed control, removing nutrient-rich topsoil to support recolonisation of native grasses, and riparian planting to restore eroded waterways.
Riparian planting at Scottsdale Reserve
Representation
Bush Heritage is addressing a key flaw in the protected area estate by strategically acquiring land that is underrepresented in the National Reserve System. Australia’s bioregional framework, the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA), classifies the continent into regions with common climate, geology, landforms, vegetation, flora, and fauna. Over half of Bush Heritage reserves occur in IBRA subregions where less than 15% of areas are protected.
Private land and connectivity
By conserving private land, Bush Heritage is addressing the second key flaw in the protected area network. Bush Heritage’s strategic, landscape approach to land acquisition also improves connectivity of the protected area estate, with the acquisition of Scottsdale Reserve as part of the K2C project being a prime example.
ANU students at Scottsdale Reserve
In sum, Bush Heritage plays a crucial role in improving the state of the protected area estate. Perhaps this will come to mind next time you hear the words ‘biodiversity conservation’.
What contains 10% of the world’s fish species, 25% of all known marine species, and 85% of the world’s species of marine turtle? No, it isn’t Lake Burley Griffin.
The Great Barrier Reef (GBR) is over 300,000km2 of some of the world’s most precious biodiversity, which means thousands of km2 of protected area requires constant management. Biodiversity conservation is only as successful as its management – so with such a diverse range of challenges facing the reef, from climate-change driven habitat loss to zoning issues, is the monitoring and management we have in place effective at delivering biodiversity outcomes?
This was the question I wanted to answer in October, when I worked with a team at the department responsible for evaluating the projects funded by the “Reef Trust Partnership” (FTP). The RTP is a collaboration between the Government, Reef Trust and Great Barrier Reef Foundation, and releases annual reports on the effectiveness of projects funded by the RTP.
Turtle climbing up a reef, Great Barrier Reef QLD – (Chad Taylor, 2020)
What makes good monitoring?
Monitoring is what underpins decision-making in management. Being accountable and certifiable is especially important in the case of the FTP which is mostly funded by tax-payer money. Good monitoring often follows the “Before After Control Impact” (BACI) principle, with monitoring that begins before an impact or change in management, after impact, and the monitoring of control sites.
Ideally, monitoring continues to improve over time, following a pattern of planning, doing, monitoring, learning and adjusting. In the case of the GBR, good monitoring will be aware of confounding variables such as climate change impacts, seasonal changes, migrations etc. and adjust the management plan as these variables change.
The ideal monitoring system, adapted from Phil Gibbons’ lecture
Okay, monitoring is cool, so is the RTP doing its job?
Let’s look the Eastern Cape York Water Quality Improvement Plan, a project under the RTP I assessed. The projects aims to minimise water quality degradation to protect habitat. The project took an initial assessment of the important habitat features. Then, vulnerable areas were identified (Namely: Princess Charlotte Bay, a fish habitat important for green turtle foraging, and Flinders Island, a region with reefs and seagrass). Finally, risky levels of anthropogenic loads in the monitored water were determined, and corrective measurement actions pre-determined if these levels were detected.
Whilst I think this plan follows good monitoring practice, I see a potential flaw. This plan employs the use of “passive adaptive management”, as it doesn’t use a range of management actions to determine which is most effective. While this makes sense for a region that isn’t under immediate threat of degradation, sudden changes in risk can leave the management unarmed as passive adaptive management relies on long-term consistent data to make minor adjustments over time. As threats to the GBR grow over time, will relying on passive management like the Eastern Cape York Plan leave managers out of options?
Cape York Natural Resource Management and South Cape York Catchments, 2016. Eastern Cape York Water Quality Improvement Plan. Cape York Natural Resource Management, Cooktown, Queensland, Australia.
Datta, A. et al. (2022) “Big events, little change: Extreme climatic events have no region-wide effect on Great Barrier Reef Governance,” Journal of Environmental Management, 320, p. 115809. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115809.
Dixon, K.M. et al. (2019) “Features associated with effective biodiversity monitoring and evaluation,” Biological Conservation, 238, p. 108221. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108221.
Pratchett, M.S. et al. (2011) “Contribution of climate change to degradation and loss of critical fish habitats in Australian marine and Freshwater Environments,” Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), p. 1062. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1071/mf10303.
Richards, Z.T. and Day, J.C. (2018) “Biodiversity of the Great Barrier Reef—how adequately is it protected?,” PeerJ, 6. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4747.
Before I volunteered with the Mt.Ainslie Weeders, weeding to me was to get rid of the unwanted plants, done and dusted. Well turns out, weeding is much more complex than you think and I am going to share with you my unexpected experience weeding with the Mt.Ainslie Weeders.
For the two weeding sessions I’ve attended, I worked in two different locations of Mt.Ainslie. One was the Old Ainslie Tip (Picture 1), and the lookout (Picture 2). The old tip used to be use as a dumping site for factory material waste which has been revegetated, while the lookout has a lot of tourists going in and out of the site.
Picture 1:Old Mt.Ainslie tip
Picture 2: Mt.Ainslie lookout
What makes a weed a weed?
Have you ever wondered, why does the word “weed” have such a negative connotation to it? Let’s clear things up here. Weeds are usually defined as plants that overtake other species and damage the ecosystem. Surprisingly, native species can also become a weed when it finds a comfortable spot to live in, and starts taking over indigenous plants.
The biggest enemy of the year
I am not an expert in plants but as soon as I arrived at the first site, I knew that our enemy was close by.(Picture3)
Sticky weeds also known as Cleavers (Galium aparine)are an annual weed that can thrive in waterlogged or dry soil. There were particularity lot of sticky weeds this year due to the heavy rains from La Niña. We carefully weeded by hand to make sure we get rid of the roots. In just a few minutes, I was able remove a significant amount.
Martin from ACT Parks and Conservation Service explains the complexity of weeding. Some weeds need to be pulled out from the root, while some simply removing the ovule is enough as some weeds could provide a habitat for fauna. Martin further explains that it is complicated because people have different perception on weeds. To some it is a threat to biodiversity, to some it is just a beautiful flower.
Photo 6: Martin explains taking off flowers are enough for some weeds
So are we doing a good job at managing weeds?
Consistency and patience are important in managing weeds. Complete eradication of weeds are impossible as many factors such as wind, birds and gravity play a role in carrying the seeds around. Although consistent weed control is possible. The use of GIS mapping is an excellent way to keep consistency on weeding. Furthermore, it is important to understand that weeding is a long-term process and our acts now are protecting plants to thrive in the future.
Welcome to the complex world of weeding
Weeding is a good way to get involved in biodiversity conservation. Behind this simple action of pulling out a weed, many factors need to be considered. Picking the best season to weed plants, people’s different perception on weeds, complex interactions between weeds and biodiversity and so on. Small actions can cause a Butterfly Effect on the ecosystem which make this very sticky situation.
I would like to thank the Mt.Ainslie Weeders and Martin from ACT Parks and Conservation Service for this opportunity.
Biodiversity Conservation 