Woodside 22 sep2015(2)

What is Bushland Condition Monitoring?
A standardized method to measure
1. Health / Condition / State of bushland
2. 10 indicators – covering main aspects of health
3. 30m x 30m quadrat
4. Permanent point for measuring changes in
condition over time
What does it comprise?
1. A manual in 3 volumes
2. SABAT database (South Australian Biodiversity Assessment Tool)
3. 1650 + sites to date across SA (NatureMaps)

http://spatialwebapps.environm
ent.sa.gov.au/naturemaps/?view
er=naturemaps
Nature Maps

What is Bushland Condition?
 Diversity? – species, lifeforms, structure
 Functional?
 self-sustaining / regenerating
 providing habitat
 “services”
 Under Threat? - degrading influences – weeds,
grazing, feral animals
 Healthy plants? or Stressed?
 Position in Landscape? – shape, size connectivity

What are the BCM Indicators? (Volume 1)
(order in the manual)
1. Plant Species Diversity
2. Weed Abundance and Threat
3. Structural Diversity (A. Ground cover, B. Native life forms)
4. Regeneration
5. Tree and Shrub Health (dieback, lerp, mistletoe)
6. Tree Habitat Features (habitat value, hollows, logs)
7. Feral Animals
8. Total Grazing Pressure
9. Fauna Species Diversity
10. Bushland Degradation Risk

What are the BCM Indicators? (Volume 1)
Conceptual Groups
Core Attributes
1. Plant Species Diversity
3. Structural Diversity (A. ground cover, B. native life forms)
4. Regeneration
9. Fauna Species Diversity
Key Threats
2. Weed Abundance and Threat
8. Total Grazing Pressure
7. Feral Animals
Overstorey Health
5. Tree and Shrub Health (dieback, lerp, mistletoe)
Overstorey Habitat Values
6. Tree Habitat Features (habitat value, hollows, logs)
Landscape Attributes
10. Bushland Degradation Risk

How does it work?
• 30m x 30m quadrat - uses a quadrat to be representative of a
patch
• 10 Indicators – actually 10-15 “calculated things” (Vol. 1) -
converts raw data  indicator scores via simple calculations
(Vol. 1)
• Benchmarks - compares indicator scores against benchmarks,
specific for different vegetation types in each region (Vol. 3)
• Condition Classes - Assigns condition states from
Very Poor (☆)– Excellent (☆☆☆☆☆), on the basis of this
comparison
• Raw Observations – very useful in their own right

Uses 30m x 30m quadrat  to be  REPRESENTATIVE of a patch
But any patch usually comprises areas of
1. Dominant Condition
2. Better Condition
3. Worse Condition
4. Edges
So need to make a decision about which area/s to set up in
Which leads us back to considering the PURPOSE of the monitoring site
Representivity

PURPOSE OF MONITORING
3 main reasons for monitoring
1. Performance Monitoring (P)
Looking to see a change due to change in management
(weeding, fencing, grazing control)
2. Resource Condition Monitoring (R)
Looking for an unbiased sample (SNAPSHOT) of condition
across a defined area / vegetation type (random patch
selection)
3. Community Engagement (E)
Looking to engage / educate landholders with the ecological
and biodiversity value of their bushland patches

REPRESENTIVITY and PURPOSE
in selecting Site Location
• Performance monitoring
o quadrat to represent the area that
will hopefully improve with change
in management
o  area that is most likely to show a
change
o  a section in worse condition
(but not too degraded?)
• Resource Condition Monitoring
o quadrat to be representative of
most vegetation in the patch
o in section of dominant condition
for the patch (might be good or
bad)
Site Selection Metadata
Whichever is chosen
(Dominant, Better, Worse)
RECORD which it is and
why it was chosen
• Community Engagement
o want to show vegetation in its
best / most interesting light
o in area of better condition
for the patch

Site Selection Metadata
REPRESENTIVITY CONFIDENCE
• How far can I extrapolate these findings?
• Different management on neighbouring properties?
• Ecological gradients – soil, aspect, slope, exposure, etc.
Representivity Metadata
• Using aerial photography + SA vegetation mapping
• Draw or digitise representivity confidence polygons
(High, Moderate, Low) for the area around the quadrat
• Or assign representivity confidence (High, Moderate,
Low) to nearby patches

Monitoring Timing
TIMING
• 5 years
– Recommended maximum interval
between assessments
– For Long term trends
• Yearly
– Optimal but not necessary
– Yearly, medium and long term trends
• Twice a year
– For the enthusiast with lots of time
and money
– Spring = maximum biomass and
diversity
– Autumn = minumum biomass and
diversity
– Seasonal, yearly, medium and long
term trends
• However - Re-
assessments need to be
made in
to be
comparable
• Spring  Spring
• Autumn  Autumn

What are Benchmark Communities? (Volume 3)
• 10-15 benchmark vegetation communities for each NRM
region
• Basically pre-European (best example) (non-derived)
• Summarise many specific vegetation associations under a
smaller number of main types, which share similar
characteristics in terms of structure, soils, rainfall, understorey
species, and expected indicator scores
• Volume 3 – communities described, in terms of geography,
soils, rainfall, species, vegetation structure, and benchmarks
for the 10 indicators - e.g. of benchmark table

2. Forests and Woodlands with an Open
sclerophyll Shrub Understorey – Benchmark
Scores
Indicator Very Poor Poor Moderate Good Excellent
1. Species Diversity < 6 6 - 12 13 - 20 21 - 30 31+
2. Weed Abundance &
Threat
> 28 19 - 28 13 - 18 8 - 12 < 8
3. Structural Diversity A -
Ground Cover
< 0 0 1 - 2 3 4
3. Structural Diversity B –
Plant Life Forms
< 6 6 - 8 9 - 13 14 - 18 19+
4. Regeneration – Trees 0 1 2 3 4+
4. Regeneration Trees &
Woody Shrubs
0 1 2 - 3 4 - 5 6+
5. Tree Health – Dieback < –4 -4 to –1.1 -1.0 to 0.9 1 to 2.5 > 2.5
5. Tree Health - Lerp -4 to -1.6 -1.5 to 0.4 0.5 to 1.9 2 to 3 > 3
5. Tree Health - Mistletoe < -3 -3 to –2.1 -2 to –0.6 -0.5 to 0.4 > 0.5
6. Tree Habitat Score 0 - 1 2 - 3 4 - 6 7 - 8 9 - 10
6. Tree Hollow Score 0 1 2 - 4 5 - 6 7+
6. Fallen Trees and Logs 0 1 2 3 4+
7. Feral Animal Abundance > 7 5.1 - 7 2.1 - 5 1.1 - 2 0 - 1
7. Feral Animal Frequency < -22 -22 to -16 -15 to –11 -10 to –5 -4 to 0
8. Total Grazing Pressure < -17 -17 to –10 -9 to -5 -4 to -1 0

The 10 Indicators – Methods and Scoring
• What is measured and how?
• How is the indicator score calculated?
• How is the condition class assigned?

Indicator 1. Plant Species Diversity
METHOD
• All plant species - record all plant species inside
quadrat, including weeds (use later)
• Overhanging plants – included
• Dead Plants - include dead plants if still attached
by roots
• Mistletoe - don’t forget
• Moss and Lichen species – not included

Method
• Start - start with obvious overstorey
and understorey species
• Microbotany - on your knees in a
corner get your eye in for ground
level / small understorey spp.
• Searching - make sure cover all
quadrat - walk around the edges of
quadrat in circular direction then
come back to centre
• Plant Refuges - Check bases of
trees, shrubs and rocks
• Working Names - Use for species
you don’t know “small, fuzzy
lanceloate opposite leaves”
• Collect / Photograph specimens -
Indicate collected plants with © -
press for future reference
• collect a bit of everything (unless
v. few)
• Taxanomic uncertainty – write
“?” before genus or species name
to show not sure e.g. ?*Trifolium
sp., e.g. Austrostipa ?nodosa

Method
• Weeds - write “*” in front of plant
name to indicate is weed e.g.
*Plantago lanceolata
Not sure if weed? write (U) next
to name / working name. Note: If
(U) is abundant, need to estimate
% cover as an individual species
for possible inclusion in other
indicators
• In addition, while searching
quadrat for species - take note of
the most abundant weeds, plus
regeneration and grazing of
native species (for later)
Note: When you get more
experienced, you will want to make
your observations for all indicators as
you go around the first time 
1. saves time
2. reduces impact on quadrat
Will still need more than one “lap”
5-10+ “laps” is still pretty typical
Is hard to keep memory of all corners
of the quadrat at the same time

Indicator 1. Species Diversity
Indicator Score
Calclulation
• Add up the number of native
species
Deriving a Condition Rating
• Compare the score against the
benchmarks in the tables
• Spring species count  multiply
benchmarks x 20%
Some vegetation types are expected
to have more species than others
• E.g. Good condition for samphire
= 5 species vs heathy forest (24)
• E.g. Good condition in Heathy
forest in Autumn = 24 species
(Spring = 29)

Indicator 2a. Weed Abundance and Threat
Indicator combines abundance and
threat/invasiveness into a single score
Method
• “5 most abundant”- decide which are 5 most
abundant inside quadrat (abundance = %
projective cover)
• Estimate % cover (projective cover = shade
caused by a light shining from directly above,
as a proportion of the whole quadrat)
• Include dead plants if they are still attached
to ground (e.g. annual grasses, dried up herbs
– i.e. not litter yet).
Coming
up

Indicator 2a. Weed Abundance and Threat
Calculating the Indictor Score
• Cover Ratings – convert % cover for
each species to a cover rating (1-6)
using table
• Weed Threat Ratings – find the weed
threat rating for each species using
the table
• Individual Species Score = cover
rating x threat rating
• Site Score = sum for the 5 species
Deriving the corresponding
Condition Rating
• Compare – against the
benchmarks in the table
• Assign – a condition class from
Very Poor (☆) to Excellent (☆☆☆☆
☆)
Notes
• some vegetation communities
considered more susceptible
and/or resilient to weeds than
others
• e.g. SMLR 1 Heathy Woodlands: 9
= Good (not too weedy), while for
SMLR 8 Samphire: 9 = Poor (really
weedy for Samphire)

Indicator 2b. Red Alert Weeds
Method
• Red Alert Weeds = threat rating 3, 4,
or 5
• Record presence/absence (not
abundance)
• in quadrat
• in surrounding bushland patch
• elsewhere on property
• Remember to keep an eye out as
you drive around property and walk
to the monitoring site
Calculating Indicator Score
• Score for Quadrat = number of
species
• Score for Patch = number of
species (including quadrat)
• Score for Property = number of
species (including patch and
quadrat)
• Not benchmarked (any high
threat weeds are bad – none is
good)
Indicator recognises that high threat weeds are highly significant
even if currently low abundance (or not in quadrat)

Structural Diversity A – Ground Cover
Stablility and protection of the soil
Looks at all possible components of
ground cover – but the relative
contribution of each component can
vary significantly even among healthy
examples of the same vegetation type
Therefore the only consistent aspect of
soil health that applies consistently
across the board is the amount of
“truly bare ground” and so this is what
the indicator uses

Method
• Estimate % cover of ground cover
components
 Native
 Weed
 Litter
 Rock
 Moss, lichen, microphytic crust
 Bare Ground
• Imagine the mosaic – after quadrat
sawn off with a chainsaw at shoe-
sole height
• So… this means
• Trees and shrubs = only cross-section
of stems
• Hanging foliage = only if resting on
the ground
• Moss and lichen - on rocks as well as
soil (record amount on each)
• Overlap – there may be some
overlap
• because hard to tell layers apart
• real overlap e.g. litter on moss,
foliage on weed
• carpet / lino analogy
• accounting for overlap - add up
the total and see if you can
account for the overlap

• Truly Bare Ground = only component
for calculating the score
• learn to distinguish microphytic crust
from bare ground (the “tap tap” test)
• Highly organic soil crumbly “humus”
will be considered “litter” where it is
obviously derived from litter
decomposition

Calculating the Score
• Sum % cover of all non-bare
components
• Cover Rating non-bare components -
convert total non-bare % cover to a
cover rating using the table
• Cover Rating of Bare Ground - convert
% cover of bare ground to cover rating
using the table
• Site Score = add the sum of non-bare
and bare ratings together
Deriving a Condition Rating
• Compare Site Score – against the
benchmarks using the tables
• Assign a Condition Class - from Very
Very Poor (☆) to Excellent (☆☆☆☆☆)
Notes
• E.g. Coastal dune communities are
expected to have higher bare ground
than sclerophyll forests and woodlands

Indicator 3. Structural Diversity B – Native Life-forms
Indicator recongnises importance of
diversity of native life-forms in
providing habitat for both plant and
animal species
Habitat diversity is maximised by a
higher number of life-forms and by
a higher % cover in each life-form
present

Indicator 3. Structural Diversity B – Native Life-forms
METHOD
• Estimate % cover - in each life-form
category (Volume 1)
• Cover Ratings – convert % cover to
cover ratings for each layer using the
table
NOTES
• Group native species – in each layer
• Dead Plants – include dead plants if
still attached
• Flower Heads – included in height
• Current Life-form – not what it may
grow into
• “Tussocks” = sedges, rushes and
similar forms - non-grass, perennial,
mostly stiff blades – Juncus, Gahnia,
Dianella, Schoenus spp.
• Woody Herbs – counted as herbs e.g.
Vittadinia spp.
CALCULATING THE INDICATOR SCORE
• Site Score = sum of cover ratings
ASSIGNING A CONDITION CLASS
• Compare – the score against the
benchmarks for the vegetation
community and assign a condition rating
Very Poor (☆) to Excellent (☆☆☆☆☆)
NOTES
• Some plant communities are expected
to have greater diversity of life-forms
than others
• E.g. Samphire: 8 = Good
• Heathy Forest: 8 = Poor

Indicator4. Regeneration
This indicator recognises vegetation needs to be
self-sustaining in terms of recruitment
Epsisodic recruitment events aside (e.g. flood /
fire), most systems have a background rate of
recruitment of trees and shrubs that is
characteristic of the vegetation type
(at least over medium to long term time scales)
Indicator uses tree and woody shrub species
only  more conservative / practical measure

Indicator4. Regeneration
METHOD
• Count Seedlings and Juveniles -
inside the quadrat for each native tree
shrub species
• Count Adults – for each species with
seedlings or juveniles
• Count Number of height classes - for
each native tree and shrub species
(e.g. S, J, A: young adult, mature
adult, old adult, senescent adult)
NOTES
• Definition of Seedling -
Eucalypts: < 1m
Other tree species: <0.5m
Shrubs: <10cm (use judgement)
• Definition of Juvenile – smaller than
adult + yet to flower or fruit
• Very numerous ?  estimate
• Site Score = number of native tree and
shrub species with either a seedling or
juvenile present
• Seedling Abundance – assign rating
using table and sum for site
• Juvenile Abundance – as above
from Very Poor (☆) to Excellent (☆☆☆☆
☆)
NOTES
• May need several re-assessments for
accurate picture

Indicator 5. Tree and Shrub Health
Uses the dominant overstorey layer
(tree or shrub) as an indicator of system
stress levels
And recognises the overstorey’s
dominant role in affecting the “micro-
environment” of the understorey
Signs of physiological stress in the
canopies:
Dieback
Lerp
Mistletoe

Indicator 5. Tree and Shrub Health
METHOD
• Tree Map - map the 10 nearest trees
to the corner post
• Inside or Outside Quadrat? both
• Measure distance - bearing - species -
number of trunks – girth at breast
height (GBH) (1.35m)
NOTES
• Which trees? – native, adult, from
species comprising the dominant
overstorey layer (tallest layer with
>5% cover)
• doesn’t have to be currently in upper
stratum, as long as is adult
• Alive or Dead (as long as still
attached by roots)
• Dead, snapped off trees - don’t
measure if no trunk at 1.35m (breast
height)
NOTES
• 1 tree or 2 trees? – “if trunks touch
above ground = 1 tree”

Indicator 5. Tree and Shrub Health – 1. Dieback
METHOD
• Estimate %Dieback for each of the 10
trees
• Apply dieback rating to each tree
using the table and diagrams
Dieback
• = % of canopy missing/dead due to ill
health
• View from all sides – to estimate
dieback
• Look for healthy trees nearby
• From the tips (not density) imagine
branches have leaves all the way to
ends
• Lower branches – don’t count loss of
leaves on lowest branches
• Epicormic leaves - do count as
dieback
• Long Dead Branches? Judgement call
- dieback or possibly storm damage
• Site Score = sum of individual dieback
ratings  10
☆)
NOTES
• Do different communities expect
different levels of dieback?
•
•

Indicator 5. Tree and Shrub Health – 2. Lerp Damage
METHOD
• Estimate % of leaves with Lerp
Damage for each of the 10 trees
• Assign Lerp Damage Rating to each
tree using the table and diagrams
Lerp Damage
• Datum = % of leaves with signs of
significant lerp damage (>10% of
individual leaf area?)
• Difficult to distinguish – Lerp may be
difficult to distinguish from other
forms of attack  estimate total % of
leaves with damage from any source.
• Use binoculars – and extrapolate from
a representative clump
• Check upper branches – older leaves
on lower branches have more
accumulated damage
• Site Score = sum of individual lerp
ratings  10
☆)
NOTES
• Different species are more or less
susceptible to lerp

Indicator 5. Tree and Shrub Health – 3. Mistletoe
METHOD
• Count the number of mistletoe on
each of the 10 trees
• Assign a Mistletoe Rating to each tree
using the table
Mistletoe
• Alive or Dead? Count alive only
• Difficult to distinguish – Mistletoe
mimic their host
• Use binoculars
• Site Score = sum of mistletoe ratings for
the ten trees ÷ 10
DERIVING A CONDITION CLASS
☆)
NOTES
• Species susceptibility – some species
are more susceptible to mistletoe

Indicator 6. Tree Habitat Value A. Tree Habitat Value
Recognises the importance of tree
size, canopy health, tree hollows
and fallen trees and logs, in
providing food, protection and a
variety of niches
No equivalent measures for shrub
habitat

Indicator 6. Tree Habitat Value A. Tree Habitat Value
3 MEASURES
A. Tree Habitat Value
B. Tree Hollows
C. Fallen Trees and Logs
CALCULATING THE INDICATOR
SCORE
• Individual Tree Score = size
category rating + canopy health
rating + hollows rating
• Site Score = number of trees with
score >5
community and assign a condition
rating from Very Poor (☆) to
Excellent (☆☆☆☆☆)
NOTES
Different size ratings for mallee vs.
non-mallee eucalypts
METHOD
• Measure the Girth
- at breast height (1.35m)
- multistems? – measure largest
- assign a size rating from the
table
• Assign a Canopy Health Rating –
- using the %dieback estimations
already done
• Hollows - search for hollows
and assign a hollow rating to
each tree using the table

Indicator 6. Tree Habitat Value B. Tree Hollows
3 MEASURES
B. Tree Hollows
• Site Score = number of trees with a
hollow
rating from Very Poor (☆) to Excellent
(☆☆☆☆☆)
NOTES
Hollows near ground less likely to be used
– use judgement
B. Tree Hollows
Rule of thumb – a hollow is useful
if you could fit your whole thumb
Fissures and Bark – if relatively
stable / permanent
METHOD
Record presence / absence of any
hollows in each of the 10 trees

Indicator 6. Tree Habitat Value C. Fallen Trees and Logs
3 MEASURES
B. Tree Hollows
• Site Score = number of logs in the
quadrat
(☆☆☆☆☆)
NOTES
• Minimum size criteria - Is the same
minumum size reasonable for mallee
as for woodland species?
• Full weight resting on ground
and dead
• Minimum size:  10 cm wide at
widest point
• 1 log or 2? – judgement call - if
obviously detached from a larger
limb, count separately
• Weed species – include
METHOD
Record number of logs inside the
quadrat

Indicator 7. Feral Animal Abundance
Recognises that vegetation is unlikely
to be providing sustainable habitat for
many native animal species if there are
foxes or cats
Recognises that regeneration of many
native plant species is likely to be low
if rabbits, sheep, goats, or deer are
present in the area

Indicator 7. Feral Animal Abundance
• Site Score = number of signs / ha
(☆☆☆☆☆)
NOTES
• Where signs are very numerous,
record no more than 1 sign per 10m2
approx.
METHOD
Record number of signs inside a 50m
radius of the centre of quadrat
• Vertebrates only - include
introduced birds (compete with
native birds)
• Main signs - dung, scratchings, dens
/ burrows, live animal
• Stock animals – include sheep,
goats, deer etc. if not mandated
• Kangaroos / Koalas – make a note,
but record separately

Indicator 8. Grazing Pressure
Recognises grazing pressure in the
understorey as a significant impact on the
regenerative capacity of bushland
Grazing by any vertebrate species (native,
stock, feral)
Grazing on all native species (not weeds)
(including all native life-forms)

Indicator 8. Grazing Pressure
• Individual Species Score = sum of
grazing ratings for that species
• Site Score = sum of grazing ratings for
all native species
(☆☆☆☆☆)
NOTES
• Palatability – useful information can
also be obtained using information on
palatability of species, where known
3 Grazing Intensities - Light (L) - Heavy
(H) - Severe (S)
METHOD
Record number of plants (or % of
plant population ) grazed at each level
of intensity (L,H,S) for each native
species
Assign a grazing rating – to each
instance of grazing using the table
• Native Species – all native species
including herbs / non woody species
• Total population size – record /
estimate this for the calculations
• Who is grazing? – doesn’t matter
whether native or introduced grazer
• Koala / Cocky grazing on upper
canopy – not included

Indicator 9. Fauna Species Diversity
• Score = number of species
• Not benchmarked
NOTES
• This information is important to relate
vegetation condition with habitat
function
• These will become official opportune
records - BCM data integrated with
BDBSA and ALA
• Not benchmarked
• Cumulative
METHOD
• Record observations of native
animal species
• Vertebrate species only
• Collect - notes, photos, dung, and
other traces
NOTES
• Important to collect: date, time,
weather, location, behaviour

Indicator 10. Bushland Degradation Risk
• Site Score = sum of ratings for A, B, C
and D
benchmarks (common to all
benchmark communities) and assign a
condition rating from Very Poor to
Excellent
NOTES
METHOD
Record information on
A. Size and Nature of Remnant
B. Shape of Remnant
C. Surrounding Land Use
D. Remnancy in Environmental
Association
Assign a ratings to these using the
tables
A. Size and Nature – desktop
• Boundary fences – patches end
at boundary fences
B. Shape – desktop
C. Land Use – field and desktop
D. Remnancy – Nature Maps
• Near edge of EA – use average

Visual % cover Estimation
• Projective Cover = area of shade
caused by a light shining from directly
above, as a proportion of the whole
quadrat
• 2 (or more) -step process – involves
estimating Extent and Density and
then multiplying them together and
then adding up sub-areas
• % Extent = the fraction of the
quadrat covered by the sum of
polygons around the perimeters of
canopies
• % Density = the fraction of shade
produced by the leaves and branches
within a typical plant canopy polygon
• % cover = ∑ %Extent x %Density
(repeat for any number of sub-areas in the quadrat
 then add them up)
Method for “Extent”
• Tetris - imagine stacking polygons of
canopies into a corner, tetris-style,
without compression
• Standard Corners – use diagrams of
standard corners of different
fractions of a 30m x 30m quadrat to
decide which corner they would fit
into
• Standard Area Diagrams – use
diagrams of standard areas 5%, 25%,
50% and 75% to estimate the cover
of canopies without “compression”
Method for “Density”
• Look up (or down) through the
canopy and estimate the fraction of
shade made by the leaves under a
light shining directly from above (or
what fraction blue sky, looking up) .
• Revise and Cross-check against other
components etc. until you’re happy

Stepwise estimation
> or < 50% ?
> or < 75% ?
> or < 90% ?
> or < 95% ?
> or < 25% ?
> or < 5% ?
> or < 1% ?

Estimating Cover – Pushing into a
Corner
30 m x 30 m square
1%
5%
10%
25%
50%
3m
3m
7m
7m
10m
10m
30 m
30 m
3 m x 3 m square in a 30 m x 30 m square
0.1%
0.5%
1m 2m
3m
1%
3m
2m
1m
30 cm
30 cm
.01%

Cover Calculation Matrix
0% 1% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%
1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5% 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5
10% 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10
15% 0 1 2 2 3 4 5 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 14 15
20% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
25% 0 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 23 24 25
30% 0 2 3 5 6 8 9 11 12 14 15 17 18 20 21 23 24 26 27 29 30
35% 0 2 4 5 7 9 11 12 14 16 18 19 21 23 25 26 28 30 32 33 35
40% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
45% 0 2 5 7 9 11 14 16 18 20 23 25 27 29 32 34 36 38 41 43 45
50% 1 3 5 8 10 13 15 18 20 23 25 28 30 33 35 38 40 43 45 48 50
55% 1 3 6 8 11 14 17 19 22 25 28 30 33 36 39 41 44 47 50 52 55
60% 1 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60
65% 1 3 7 10 13 16 20 23 26 29 33 36 39 42 46 49 52 55 59 62 65
70% 1 4 7 11 14 18 21 25 28 32 35 39 42 46 49 53 56 60 63 67 70
75% 1 4 8 11 15 19 23 26 30 34 38 41 45 49 53 56 60 64 68 71 75
80% 1 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80
85% 1 4 9 13 17 21 26 30 34 38 43 47 51 55 60 64 68 72 77 81 85
90% 1 5 9 14 18 23 27 32 36 41 45 50 54 59 63 68 72 77 81 86 90
95% 1 5 10 14 19 24 29 33 38 43 48 52 57 62 67 71 76 81 86 90 95
100% 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
PercentofQuadratCoveredbyCanopies
Percent of Canopies covered by leaves and branches

E.G. Estimating Canopy Cover
Quadrat Covered by Canopies Outlines
461 m2
461 m2 / 900 m2 = 51%
Canopies Covered by Leaves and
Branches
45%
• Overall Cover
• 45% x 51%
• = 23% = ‘sparse’
Quadrat = 900 m2

Step 0 – Assigning a Benchmark Vegetation Community
Notes
 Current vegetation
association – may be
significantly different to the
pre-European state
 Pre-European or other
target ? – pre-European may
not always be the most
desirable, or practical target
for management
Method
• Current Formation - is it
significantly modified or
relatively unmodified
• Understorey – is it significantly
modified or relatively unmodified
• Volume 3 – use the decision tree
and chapter descriptions to
determine which one is
appropriate

Site Establishment
Equipment
 2 Star Droppers
 aerial photo
 3 x 60m tapes
 camera
 compass
 binoculars
 Dressmakers measuring tape
First Steps (? last steps)
 select site for quadrat
 permanently mark and
photograph
 describe the bushland
patch

1 - Setting up
Quadrat
Size
 30m x 30m
 any configuration of 900m2
Orientation
 NSEW is standard
 corner post (star dropper) – one of northern corners (photo considerations)
 photo post (star dropper) – 10 m from corner looking into middle of quadrat (45o
to one side)
Location
 Representative
 Non-edge
Recording
Non-standard set-up is permissible, all details being carefully recorded

Site Naming Convention
e.g. B U R – M C K B – B – 2
• Part 1 _ _ _ = 1st 3 letters of nearest
town or gazzetted locality (e.g. Burra)
• Part 2 _ _ _ _ = 1st 3 letters of
landowner’s surname + landowner’s
first initial (Brian McKeough)
• Part 3 _ = letter A, B, C… assigned to
each separate patch of bushland on a
property (2nd patch with a monitoring
site on this property)
• Part 4 _ = number 1, 2, 3… assigned
to each successive quadrat set up in a
patch (2nd quadrat set up in this
patch)
• Roadside: Part 2 _ _ _ _ = 1st 4
letters of road name
• Reserves: Part 2 _ _ _ _ = 1st 2
letters of reserve name + initials
of park status e.g. CP

Step 2 – Setting up Photopoints
METHOD
• Set up quadrat with a view to a good
photo
• Camera-post = cnr stake
• Sighter post = 10m @ 45o (or other
good sightline)
• Record distance and bearing, height
of camera / camera post and sighter
post
• Photo - focus and centre on the site-
board
• Quadrat edges – also take photos
down edges to show orientation of
quadrat for re-assessments
• Re-assessments - similar time of day
= similar light conditions.

Step 3 - Bushland Description
Describing the patch / sub-
patch
= the area of which the
quadrat is a representative
sample
1. Vegetation Structure
2. Landscape Description
3. Disturbance History

3 - Bushland Description
A. Vegetation Structure
South Australian Vegetation Classification
System  structural formation
Uses:
1. Life form of the tallest layer (e.g.
tree, shrub)
2. Ave. height of the tallest layer
3. % Cover of the tallest layer
METHOD
Dominant stratum - identify the tallest
layer with cover  5%
Average Height – estimate the ave. ht of
plants that belong to this stratum
% cover – estimate the average %
projective cover in the patch / sub-patch
Determining the structural formation
Using the combination of 1, 2, and 3 and
the table, assign the patch a vegetation
formation
Notes
• Average % cover in patch maybe
different to % cover in quadrat
• weeds may comprise part of the
dominant stratum
• Benchmark Community – current
formation may not correspond to
assigned Benchmark Community due
to disturbance

Vegetation Formations in South Australia
LIFEFORM/
HEIGHTCLASS
PROJECTIVEFOLIAGECOVEROFTALLESTSTRATUM
Dense (70 – 100%) Mid-dense (30 – 70%) Sparse (10 – 30%) Very Sparse (<10%)
Trees> 30m Tall closedforest Tall openforest Tall woodland Tall openwoodland
Trees10– 30m Closedforest Openforest Woodland Openwoodland
Trees5– 10m Lowclosedforest Lowopenforest Lowwoodland Lowopenwoodland
Trees<5m Verylowclosedforest Verylowopenforest Verylowwoodland Verylowopenwoodland
Mallee> 3m Closedmallee Mallee Openmallee Veryopenmallee
Mallee< 3m Closedlowmallee Lowmallee Openlowmallee Veryopenlowmallee
Shrubs> 2m Tall closedshrubland Tall shrubland Tall openshrubland Tall veryopenshrubland
Shrubs1– 2m Closedshrubland Shrubland Openshrubland Veryopenshrubland
Shrubs< 1m Lowclosedshrubland Lowshrubland Lowopenshrubland Lowveryopenshrubland
Grasses Closedgrassland Grassland Opengrassland Veryopengrassland
Sedges Closedsedgeland Sedgeland Opensedgeland Veryopensedgeland

Part B: Landscape Description
Slope (circle any of the following in the Assessment Area)
Relatively flat land, slope < 50 Moderately steep, slope 50– 200
Steep hillside, slope > 200
Landform (circle any in Assessment Area)
Flat/plain Valley bottom Ridge-top Hill slope Swamp
Creekline River Floodplain Sand dune Inter-dune Swale
Soil type (Tick one)
Mainly Sand Sandy-loam Mainly Loam Clay-loam Mainly
Clay Other: Ironstone
(fine texture, water penetrates rapidly)
(high moisture holding capacity)
Assessment Site Landscape (use the descriptive words above to
describe landscape for each assessment site)
Assessment Site No. 1 On mod –steep slope in scrub, thin sandy loam over ironstone
ridge.
Assessment Site No. 2 In Gully, mainly sandy loam with sparse ironstone.
How does this assessment area vary from other areas of bush?

3. Bushland Description
B. Landscape Description
• Slope
is the ground at head height = 20m away ? slope 5o
is the ground at head height = 5m away ? slope 20o
• Aspect = useful information (which direction would a ball
roll ?)
• Soil
o is it sand, loam, clay, clay-loam ?
o what colour is it ? yellow, brown, red, grey, black ?
o are there rocks ? are they outcropping-like ? or strew-like ?

3. Bushland Description
C. Disturbance History
• Past Land-use
• Current Land Use
• Fire History
• Tree Clearance
• Understorey Clearance

Woodside 22 sep2015(2)

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (16)

Semelhante a Woodside 22 sep2015(2)

Semelhante a Woodside 22 sep2015(2) (20)

Último

Último (20)

Woodside 22 sep2015(2)

Notas do Editor