final royal tasmanian botanical gardens living collections ...€¦ · world network of botanic...
TRANSCRIPT
INSPIRE: n. the arousing of feelings, ideas and impulses that lead to a creative activity. v. to uplift the mind of spirit. PLACE: n. the connection between nature and culturewhich gives meaning to our everyday life. v. to position or arrange. NOTHOFAGUS GUNNII: n. Deciduous beech, the only native deciduous tree endemic to the island of Tasmania, Australia.
FINAL
Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens
LIVING COLLECTIONS PLAN
Inspiring Place
ROYAL TASMANIAN BOTANICAL GARDENS LIVING COLLECTIONS PLAN
prepared for the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens
Inspiring Place Pty Ltd
Environmental Planning, Landscape Architecture,
Tourism & Recreation
208 Collins St Hobart TAS 7000
T: 03 6231-1818 F: 03 6231 1819 E: [email protected]
ACN 58 684 792 133
in collaboration with
The Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collections Working Group
Alan Matchett
Director Dunedin Botanic Gardens
Date Version
21.12.07 Preliminary Draft
14.03.08 Draft for Internal Review
19.05.08 Draft for Steering Committee and Board Review Prior to Public Consultation
July 2008 Draft for Steering Committee and Board Review Prior to Public Consultation V2
11.07.08 Draft for Steering Committee and Board Review Prior to Public Consultation V3
04.08.08 Draft for Steering Committee and Board Review Prior to Public Consultation V4.2 (w/minor edits)
10.12.08 Draft for Public Consultation
18.05.09 Final Report 07-15/07-UUU
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1 An Overview of the RTBG ........................................................................... 1 1.2 The Living Collections Plan ......................................................................... 4
1.2.1 Management Context .................................................................. 4 1.2.2 Purpose of the Living Collections Plan ........................................ 6 1.2.3 Preparation of the Living Collections Plan................................... 7
2. The Development of the Living Collections at the RTBG ..................................... 9
2.1 Early Development – Settlement to c1900 .................................................. 9 2.2 c1900 to c2000 ............................................................................................ 11 2.3 The Start of the New Millennium.................................................................. 15 2.4 Common Threads Over Time ...................................................................... 16
3. The Living Collections Today.................................................................................. 19
3.1 Categories of Collections............................................................................. 19 3.2 Overview of the Collections ......................................................................... 20
3.2.1 Tasmanian Collections ................................................................ 21 3.2.2 Conservation and Research Collections ..................................... 23 3.2.3 Southern Hemisphere Collections ............................................... 26 3.2.4 Cultural and Ornamental Collections ........................................... 27
4. The Value of the Living Collections ........................................................................ 33
4.1 The Contribution of the Living Collections to the Values of the RTBG ..................................................................................................... 33 4.2 The Value of Individual Collections.............................................................. 35
4.2.1 Method of Assessing Individual Collections ................................ 35 4.2.2 The Results - The Values of Individual Living Collections ............................................................................................. 37
5 Issues Arising for the Management of the Living Collections .............................. 41
5.1 Issues in Relation to the Vision, Mission, Goals and Policy Framework of the SMP .......................................................................... 42
Issue 1 Focus of the Collections........................................................... 42 Issue 2 Lack of Clear Policies – Establishing New Collections ............................................................................................. 42 Issue 3 Lack of Clear Policies – De-Accession .................................... 43 Issue 4 Lack of Botanical Integrity ........................................................ 43 Issue 5 Lack of Space........................................................................... 44
5.2 Issues Identified by the Evaluation of the Collections ................................. 45 Issue 6 Strengthening the Defining Attributes ...................................... 45 Issue 7 Limited Return from Collections ............................................... 46 Issue 8 Limited Interpretation ............................................................... 48
5.3 Issues Identified with the Establishment and Care of the Living Collections ................................................................................... 48
ii Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Issue 9 Quarantine................................................................................ 48 Issue 10 Pests and Disease.................................................................. 49 Issue 11 Weeds .................................................................................... 51 Issue 12 Site Suitability and Horticulture .............................................. 51 Issue 13 Capacity to Manage ............................................................... 53 Issue 14 Big Picture Commitments and Issues (Climate Change) .................................................................... 55
6. Policies for Living Collections, Biodiversity and Conservation .......................... 57
7. Directions Forward ................................................................................................... 73
7.1 Sphere of Involvement ................................................................................. 72 7.2 Evolution of the Living Collections ............................................................... 74
7.2.1 Physical Layout - Precincts.......................................................... 74 7.2.2 Changes to Collections ............................................................... 81
Attachment A The Management Framework for the RTBG ...................................... A1
A.1 RTBG Vision ................................................................................................ A1 A.2 RTBG Mission.............................................................................................. A3 A.3 RTBG Management Goals and Strategies .................................................. A4 A.4 The Policy Framework ................................................................................. A6 A.5 Interpretation Themes.................................................................................. A8
Attachment B The Master Plan .................................................................................... B1
1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N
1 . 1 A N O V E R V I E W O F T H E R T B G
The Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens (Map 1.1) in Hobart (hereafter
referred to as the RTBG or the Gardens) has a long-standing position in the
world network of botanic gardens – botanic gardens being institutions “holding
documented collections of living plants for the purposes of scientific research,
conservation, display and education”1
Established by Governor Sorell in 1818, just two years after the Sydney
Botanical Gardens were founded, the RTBG is one of six Royal Botanical
Gardens in the world – the others being at Sydney and Melbourne in Australia,
Kew and Edinburgh in the United Kingdom and Hamilton in Ontario, Canada.
The RTBG is located on the Queens Domain, in an expansive cultural precinct
that includes, amongst other places, Government House, the historic
Beaumaris Zoo site and Soldiers Memorial Avenue all of which are set within a
larger landscape of remnant native grasslands and woody grasslands.
The RTBG itself is approximately 14.5 hectares in size including the Gardens
proper and land under the control and management of the RTBG along the
Derwent River foreshore, including Pavilion Point, though this is isolated from
the main Gardens by the Domain Highway.
The site shares a temperate climate with the rest of Tasmania. Mean
temperatures range from 11.7ºC at night to 21.5 ºC during the day in summer
and 4.4ºC to 11.5 ºC in winter. Severe frosts are infrequent due to the
proximity to the Derwent River. The long-term annual average rainfall at the
site is 567.9mm (data collected at the Gardens since 1841) but in the past 10
years has been lower at 463.6mm. Importantly, however, precipitation
exceeds evapo-transpiration over the year. The site is protected to some
extent from westerly and southwesterly winds but is exposed to strong winds
from the north and northwest that, at times, have resulted in loss of limbs
and occasionally whole trees. Sea breezes from the southeast occur in
summer and have a moderating effect on temperatures.
1 Waylen, K. 2006. Botanic Gardens: Using Biodiversity to Improve Human Well-Being Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Richmond, United Kingdom. Pg. 6
Map 1.1. Location of the RTBG.
Chapter 1 Introduction 3
The shape of the site can be described as an elongated triangle, orientated on
a north and south axis. The Gardens have an easterly aspect, a close
proximity to the Derwent River and a sweeping outlook to the Meehan Ranges
arising from its moderately sloping topography (1:5 to 1:20) that runs from sea
level to an elevation of 30m.
The underlying geology is primarily Jurassic dolerite except at the eastern
boundary where a layer of sandstone extends into the site. Naturally the soil is
light clay over heavy black clay but much of the soil within the Gardens has
been modified or improved including the importation of sandy loam soils to
some areas.
The Gardens have three primary visitor entries: the historic Main Entry via
Lower Domain Road, the Lower Entry off the Domain Highway and the
Northern Entrance from Lower Domain Road at the far end of the property.
There are also several lesser-used service entrances.
Survey data indicates that over 400,000 people visited the gardens in 2005-
2006 and that of these roughly three-quarters were Tasmanian residents. The
total visitation places the RTBG amongst the most visited recreational and
tourism attractions in the State.
The RTBG is a State Government statutory body, governed under the Royal
Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Act 2002 (hereafter, the RTBG Act) and is
administered by the Department of Environment, Parks, Heritage and Arts
(DEPHA). A seven member RTBG Board is appointed by the Minister to
manage the RTBG under the RTBG Act, with the Board appointing a Director
to manage day-to-day operations within the Gardens.
4 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
The Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens are of exceptional national, state
and local significance – being:
“...an integral part of the nation’s history, reflecting the
transition of the country from a subsistence outpost to a
community of people making a valuable contribution to
global conservation through the collection, propagation,
display and conservation of Tasmania’s native flora. In the
process of its evolution, the RTBG has become a garden of
exceptional beauty that holds a significant place in the
hearts and minds of its many users and attracts visitors
from around the world. The Gardens retains significant
reminders of its various stages of development including
built elements, living collections and individual plants dating
from the period of its colonial establishment and later
Victorian era gardenesque landscaping.
The Gardens have exceptional international significance
as a leader in the conservation of Tasmania’s flora. Many
of the species under their care and/or research only occur
in Tasmania (i.e. are endemic to the State) and as such are
of importance for the conservation of the world’s
biodiversity.”
from the Overall Statement of Significance - the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Strategic Master Plan 2008-20282.
1 . 2 T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S P L A N
1.2.1 Management Context
Given the importance of the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens to the
community, the nation’s heritage and world botanical knowledge and capital, a
considered and comprehensive approach to management is being taken – one
that is grounded in a governance framework that aims to deliver outcomes that
will sustain the site’s significant values into the long-term future (Figure 1.1).
Amongst the elements, comprising the strategic framework for the Gardens is
this current document, the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living
Collections Plan (hereafter, the Living Collections Plan or the LCP).
2 Inspiring Place 2008. Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Strategic Master Plan 2008-2028 unpublished report to the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens.
Nat
iona
l and
In
tern
atio
nal a
gree
men
tse.
g.
• In
tern
atio
nal A
gend
afo
r Bot
anic
Gar
dens
in
Con
serv
atio
n • T
he G
loba
l Stra
tegy
for
Pla
nt C
onse
rvat
ion
• 20
10 T
arge
ts fo
r Bot
anic
G
arde
ns
• C
limat
e C
hang
e co
mm
itmen
ts
Stra
tegi
c M
aste
r Pla
n(2
0 ye
ar m
anag
emen
tfra
mew
ork)
RTB
G A
ct 2
002
• A
sset
Man
agem
ent P
lan
• Vis
itor a
nd C
omm
unity
Sur
vey
• Th
emat
ic In
terp
reta
tion
Pla
n•
Con
serv
atio
n M
anag
emen
t P
lan
• Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
Pla
n
Stra
tegi
c (O
pera
tiona
l)P
lan
(5 y
ear o
pera
tiona
l fra
mew
ork)
Sta
te, L
ocal
and
Nat
iona
l Le
gisl
atio
n
Indi
vidu
al B
usin
ess
Uni
t Pla
ns
Org
anis
atio
nal c
itize
nshi
pan
d co
mm
unity
par
tner
ship
s
DTA
E d
epar
tmen
tal
oblig
atio
ns a
nd D
TAE
Cor
pora
te P
lan
2006
- 20
09
Rec
ogni
sed
prof
essi
onal
po
licie
s an
d gu
idel
ines
, e.
g.• I
CO
MO
S B
urra
Cha
rter
• Aus
tralia
n N
atur
al
Her
itage
Cha
rter
RTB
G B
usin
ess
and
Ope
ratio
nal P
lan
2007
- 20
08
Sta
tuto
ry
Non
-sta
tuto
ry
polic
y
Ope
ratio
nal
Figu
re 1
.1 R
TBG
Gov
erna
nce
Fram
ewor
k
6 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
The LCP recognises that the living collections of the RTBG are its raison
d’etre. The LCP has, therefore, been conceived within the context of the
vision, mission, goals, strategies and interpretation plan of the RTBG
(Attachment 1) which emphasise, amongst other things, the;
focus of the collections on Tasmania’s flora and associated
flora from the southern hemisphere;
role of the Gardens as an organisation that contributes to
the conservation of the world’s flora and importantly to
Tasmania’s flora; and
the long-standing contribution that the Gardens make to the
community, its economy and its sense of place.
It is critical, therefore, that the collections are managed and maintained at the
highest standards if the vision for the Gardens is to be achieved and its
significant values are to be protected.
1.2.2 Purpose of the Living Collections Plan
The purpose of the LCP is, then, to provide the basis for management of the
existing and future collections over the next 20 years (concurrent with and
responding to the strategic framework set out in the Strategic Master Plan)
including the policies and principles for management in support of the
procedures to be applied in the day-to-day activities of Gardens staff.
By way of background to the establishment of living collections policies and
procedures, the LCP provides:
background to the development of the living collections
(Section 2);
a discussion of the status and condition of the collections
today (Section 3) and their value (Section 4); and
an overview of the current concerns for the management of
the living collections (Section 5);
before setting out
a policy framework for overcoming these concerns and for
on-going management of the collections (Section 6) and
Chapter 1 Introduction 7
a series of recommendations to guide the evolution of the
living collections over the next 20 years in line with the
Strategic Master Plan (Section 7).
For the purposes of the LCP, a living collection is defined as a managed group
of plants/and or propagules that describes a particular collecting focus. It need
not be physically grouped in one location, and a single accession may be part
of multiple collections. Nor does a collection need to be in-ground as it can be
comprised of stored propagation materials (i.e. a seed collection) or potted
collections held in a nursery and/or other dedicated sites.
In addition, a collection may meet one or more of the general objectives of
conservation, research, education, ornamental display or maintenance of
heritage values.
1.2.3 Preparation of the Living Collections Plan
The Preparation of the Living Collections Plan has included a review of
documents of relevance including the Situational Analysis of the Cultural
Landscape of the Tasmanian Botanical Gardens 20063 which incorporates
some guidance on the status of the various areas of the Gardens and
directions for their management and great detail about individual beds, mature
trees and built structures. Some of the issues raised therein are incorporated
at a broad level in the following discussion.
The Living Collections Plan has also been informed by a history of the
Gardens prepared as part of the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens
Conservation Management Plan and by the writing of the Royal Tasmanian
Botanical Gardens Strategic Master Plan.
The bulk of the information herein, represents new work conducted as part of
the preparation of the current Living Collections Plan. This new work has been
a collaboration between:
the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collections
Working Group, with detailed input from Mark Fountain,
Botanical and Public Programs and Manager Natalie
Tapson, Horticultural Botanist:
Alan Matchett, Director of the Dunedin Botanic Gardens;
and
Inspiring Place Pty Ltd.
3 Macfadyen, A. and Papworth, N. (2006) Situational Analysis of the Cultural Landscape of the Tasmanian Botanical Gardens, Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens.
2 . T H E D E V E L O P M E N T O F T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S A T T H E R T B G
The following section provides a chronological history of the development of
living collections within the Gardens. A more comprehensive history of the
Gardens as a whole is found in the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens
Conservation Management Plan4.
2 . 1 E A R L Y D E V E L O P M E N T – S E T T L E M E N T T O C 1 9 0 0
The Government Gardens were established by Lieutenant-Governor William
Sorell in 1818. The initial purpose of the Gardens was to supply the
Governor’s table and for the acclimatization of fruit and vegetables. There are
few records from the period, giving little indication of what was grown, but it
appears the gardens were poorly maintained.
In 1827 Lieutenant-Governor George Arthur expressed the wish for a botanical
garden on the Domain with the addition of local native plants to the collection.
The appointment of Superintendent William Davidson in December 1828 saw
the realization of this wish, with 150 native species collected from
Mt Wellington within four months of his engagement. A report in the local
newspaper, The Courier, from February 1834 stated that 141 plants of over 60
species of native flora collected from Mt Wellington and the banks of the Huon
River were sent by Davidson to the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
Davidson had already expanded the collection on his arrival, bringing around
200 vines, various fruit trees, ornamentals and seed from England as well as a
supply of tools. He oversaw the construction of the Arthur Wall in 1829 but the
heating system that it incorporated was unnecessary because unlike England,
fruit in Tasmania did not require additional heat to ripen. He did, however,
utilize 50 ft of the wall to support the RTBG’s first glasshouse, a lean-to
construction that housed 200 pineapples. This new direction appears to have
been short-lived and by 1838, four years after Davidson’s untimely dismissal,
the collection was again recorded as being in a poor state.
The management of the Government Gardens fell to the Botanical and
Horticultural Society of Van Diemen’s Land (after various amalgamations and
re-namings later to become the Royal Society of Tasmania) in 1844 under
Lieutenant-Governor John Eardley-Wilmot. The appointment of
Superintendent Francis Newman in 1845 led to the addition of 60 new genera 4 Godden, Mackay and Logan 2008. Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Conservation Management Plan unpublished report to the RTBG.
10 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
comprised of over 250 species to the living collection. The function as an
acclimatization garden continued through the 19th century, with Newman
bringing 28 varieties of apple from England and the development of an
experimental orchard during his tenure.
It is unclear what happened to Davidson’s original native collection but
Newman prepared beds for 50 local native species and a New Zealand
collection in the northern section of the Gardens. It was during Newman’s time
that the Royal Society sought more scientific rigour in the collection with the
establishment of a garden based on plant systematics. This came to fruition
with the construction of a circular garden with plants scientifically grouped and
labeled5. A pinetum was also planted during Newman’s time. This collection
was built on by his successor Francis Abbot Jr with further conifer plantings on
the steep banks above the Lily Pond in 1862 and the lining of the carriageway
to the new entrance in the 1870s.
The first scientific journal published in Tasmania was the Tasmanian Journal
and when this ceased publication in 1849, papers were published directly by
the Royal Society. The Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of
Tasmania provide a sound record of the living collection until 1885 when the
administration of the Gardens passed from the Royal Society to the state
government under the Tasmanian Museum and Botanical Gardens Act 1885.
The Catalogue of Plants in the Royal Society’s Gardens published in 1857 and
1865 list all taxa (species, varieties, cultivars) grown at the Gardens in that
year. The 1857 list divides the collection into Trees and Shrubs (496 taxa),
Climbers (71), Coniferae (135), Roses (70), Herbaceous Plants (200), Bulbs
and Tuberous Rooted Plants (162), Annuals (177), Succulents (19), Fruit
Trees (Apples (103), Cyder Apples (8), Pears (54), Vines (29), Oranges (8),
Apricots (6), Plums (25), Nectarines (1), Cherries (12), Mulberries (2), Medlar
(1), Figs (6), Gooseberries (10), Currants (1), Raspberry (1), Agricultural
Grasses etc.(26).
As well as the catalogues, the List of Plants Introduced into the Gardens of the
Royal Society of Tasmania was published from at least 1859 until 1884. The
lists, however, give no idea of where specimens were planted, making it
difficult to gauge whether the trees listed are those surviving today. Francis
Abbott Jr (Superintendent from 1859-1903) is largely responsible for the
detailed information available in the Papers and Proceedings of the Royal
Society of Tasmania. As well as the lists he provided seasonal information on
5 The garden was likely based on a model from JC Loudon’s Encyclopedia of Gardening of which the RTBG has an 1855 copy with the words Royal Society of Tasmania written in the front cover.
Chapter 2 The Development of the Living Collections 11
the leafing, flowering and fruiting of selected species and information on the
distribution of plants to public places in Tasmania and overseas6.
Abbott was also largely responsible for the increase in the diversity of exotic
trees in the immediate area of the Gardens including the expansion of conifers
onto the Domain. In an 1887 report he suggested improvements to the natural
features of the Domain with the addition of exotics and the gradual thinning of
natives to create a park-like appearance, as funding became available. He
suggested, given water shortages, care was needed in the selection of trees
with deciduous trees only planted in the lower Domain. He proposed a
pinetum be planted on the Domain due to insufficient space for such a
collection in the Gardens themselves. Today the obvious remnants of Abbott’s
vision are the conifer plantings on the hillside opposite the Garden’s main
entrance and the 1887 avenue of Atlantic cedars on Davies Avenue.
2 . 2 C 1 9 0 0 T O C 2 0 0 0
A proposed Garden guide by Superintendent John Wardman circa 1914 and
an associated map (see Figure 2.1) prepared by students from the University
of Tasmania give us a good idea of both the location and types of collections
during that period. Wardman’s guide mentions a number of key plants and
collections that are still visible in the Gardens including:
the conifers bracketing the main entrance including the
Sequoia gigantea (now Sequoiadendron giganteum) and
Cedrus deodara as well as the Spanish fir (Abies pinsapo)
inside the gate and the Canary Island Date Palm on the
opposite side;
the wisteria opposite the Friends Cottage;
the Schinus in front of the Visitor Centre and the cork oak
(Quercus suber) below it;
the Magnolia and New Zealand Collections;
the palm collection including the existing specimen of
Phoenix canariensis, Canary Island Date Palm;
6 Abbott kept meticulous records of who received plants including names and numbers, dates, destinations and the cost to Royal Society members. As a result of Abbot’s lists, we know that much of the extant Victorian planted heritage in churches, schools and parks in Tasmania originated at the Gardens.
Map
2.1
War
dman
’s M
ap
Chapter 2 The Development of the Living Collections 13
the Lily Pond and its collection of water lilies (Nymphaea)
and the Bunya Pine (Araucaria bidwillii), the Norfolk Island
Pine (Araucaria heterophylla) and Hoop Pine (Araucaria
cunninghamii) below the pond;
the oak and elm collections of which few original plants
remain; and
elements of the conifer collection in the Pinetum along the
upper part of the Gardens including: Cedrus atlantica, Pinus
nigra var austrica, Pinus sabiniana, Pinus radiata, Pinus
jeffreyi, Pinus sylvestris and Abies nordmanniana.
Ira Thornicroft took over as Superintendent in 1936 when the Gardens were,
yet again, in a poor state. He had the rubbish tip on the large lawn above the
current Gazebo cleared and planted as a rose garden (replanted in the 1970s
and finally removed 2002), the pond cleaned out and the surrounding beds
replanted. Thornicroft designed the present Conservatory which opened in
August 1939. The display of flowers, palms and ferns was supplemented with
model gardens of different countries that were prepared by the largely female
staff during the war years. Thornicroft made several trips to collect native flora
from Mt Field in the1940s, the plants to be housed in a newly built bush house.
In 1964 the RTBG absorbed 2.2ha of land to the east of the Eardley-Wilmot
Wall (the Eastern Section) from Government House. This area has gone on to
hold a range of unrelated collections (including the conifer cultivars). The
current Fern House was also built in 1964.
By 1968 the Gardens had once again gone through a period of upheaval, the
nursery was non-functional and the Conservatory closed. A new propagator,
Tony May (who became Superintendent in 1976), was employed mid-year and
by Christmas the Conservatory was again opened, displaying coleus and
impatiens, followed by tuberous begonias which had not been displayed since
the 1950s. In the same year (1968) the new tropical house was completed
(although not officially opened until 1971 and closed in 1995) where Pete’s
Patch now stands and work started on propagating that collection. The Floral
Clock was also built in 1968 and the AMP Arch installed to commemorate the
Gardens 150th anniversary.
The French Memorial Fountain was built in 1972 in the Eastern Section. The
original intent of Stephen Walker, the designer of the French Memorial
Fountain, was for the French Fountain beds to display Tasmanian plants
collected by the early French explorers of the 18th and 19th centuries. This was
14 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
finally achieved in 2004 when much of the conifer planting was removed and
the area landscaped with appropriate Tasmanian natives.
In the following years, the Rills (1972), the Protea and Erica collections(1984)
and the Japanese Garden (1987) were all built in the Eastern Section. The
Japanese Garden was constructed as part of a sister city project with Yaizu in
Japan. It was designed by Japanese landscape architect Kanjiro Harada, and
in return an Australian garden was designed by RTBG landscaper Joseph
Vitesnik for the Hotel Seagreen in Yaizu.
The construction of the Easy Access Garden with its raised beds started
during the Year of the Disabled in 1981 and was completed in 1985. The Herb
Garden was built in 1983. The terraced beds near the Anniversary Arch
housing part of the Rhododendron and Camellia collection and the Gondwana
collection were constructed in 1984. The Cactus House was opened in 1984
and the collection refurbished in 2004, with the donation of the Oglesby
collection of cacti and succulents.
The 1990s saw the resurgence of the Tasmanian native collections and a
growing commitment to local and world flora conservation. The Epacridaceae
collection was reinstated in 1994 (the existence of an earlier 20th century
collection was unknown at the time). Conservation became a focus at this
time with the RTBG involved in roadside rescues in collaboration with the then
Department of Transport and the establishment of ex-situ collections of
threatened native species. The refurbishing of the Fern House with a
provenanced collection of Tasmanian species was begun in 2002.
The Chinese collection was established in 1996 from seed wild-collected in
Yunnan Province by then Acting Director, Jim Cane.
The 1990s also saw the impact of the root rot disease Armillaria luteobubalina
on the living collection. Two large and a number of smaller excavations took
place to remove infected plants and soil – the main lawn (1000 m3), the lawn
directly above the Gazebo (1200 m3) and the bed below the cork oak and the
American bed at the eastern end of the Floral Clock Lawn (100 m3). In all
almost 200 plants, including around 70 mature trees were removed in the
period 1996-98. Despite the loss of plants, a positive effect has been the
opening up of new vistas and remodeling of the topography of the main lawn
was undertaken to flatten part of it for events. The action to control the
disease and protect the rest of the living collection has been successful with
only one small area still infected and the status of the disease being
continually monitored.
Chapter 2 The Development of the Living Collections 15
In 1996, Pete’s Veggie Patch was established on the site of the demolished
Tropical House. Originally a small patch of unimproved ground, it was used as
a focus for the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s gardening show which
quickly developed a large following. Raised beds and paving work were
carried out by TAFE students. The site has since become an important
attraction within the Gardens for visitors.
In 1998, the RTBG received a donation of southern hemisphere conifers from
researchers at the University of Tasmania. This collection is comprised of
about 60 of the 160 extant southern hemisphere conifers, and approximately
half the collection is listed as threatened under the IUCN Red List. It has been
maintained as a potted collection due to lack of in-ground space and excess
material has been donated to the Tasmanian Arboretum. The Southern
Hemisphere potted collection has been built up with donations of associated
Gondwana flora since that time in the hope of eventually establishing an in-
ground collection.
2 . 3 T H E S T A R T O F T H E N E W M I L L E N N I U M
A cottage garden was planted around the Friends Cottage (originally the
Gatekeepers Cottage) in 2000. As the cottage was built in 1845 the Catalogue
of Plants in the Royal Society’s Gardens 1857 was used as a basis for
selection of plants for the display. The Salvia bed below the Restaurant deck
was also landscaped and planted in 2000. The Herbaceous Border was
renamed the Friends Mixed Border in 2006 after the display was extended and
refurbished, and with archways and trellises for climbing roses and clematis
added.
The Subantarctic Plant House, displaying the flora of Macquarie and Heard
Islands was officially opened in 2000. This collection is housed in a prototype
cold house, the only one of its kind in the world, displaying the flora of
Australia’s subantarctic islands. The collection serves the dual functions of
public display and providing material for research. The Tasmanian Seed
Conservation Centre (TSCC) opened in August 2005. This purpose built
facility was constructed as part of the Millennium Seed Bank Project in
partnership with the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. The TSCC has a target to
store seed of 60% of Tasmania’s threatened species by 2010 and will provide
the RTBG with a strong research focus which will likely result in positive
conservation outcomes.
16 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
2 . 4 C O M M O N T H R E A D S O V E R T I M E
A review of the history of the living collections shows that there are a number
of important threads that have run through the collections from the very early
beginnings of the Gardens to the present. For instance, the Gardens was
largely set up to provide produce for the Governor’s table and today Pete’s
Veggie Patch and the herb garden are amongst the most popular displays with
visitors.
The importance of having a Tasmanian native element in the Gardens has
also been a consistent theme from the time of Governor Arthur, although there
was little evidence of his early directives or that of his successors when the
present Tasmanian Collection was established in 1990.
Newman established the first pinetum and Abbott built on this. The conifers
remain a significant element of the Gardens today in their own right as a
taxonomic collection and individually, in many cases, as part of the significant
tree collection.
The first New Zealand collection originated in Newman’s time and by the time
Wardman produced his guide in 1914, it was well established and admired.
The areas of the Gardens developed early in its history also demonstrate
elements of a gardenesque planting style with sweeping lawns, flowing paths
and garden edges. Trees were planted as specimens to display their full form
that continues into the present including a range of plants with exotic forms
such as those of the Auracareacea, cordilines, etc.
More current RTBG living collections reflect rising and strengthening social
and environmental consciousness since the late 1960s onwards. The Easy
Access Gardens is an early example of horticultural therapy and later the
Chinese collection responded to the need for greater botanical integrity in the
development of collections. Most recently environmental emphases have
brought a focus on the conservation of flora and water and a growing
awareness of the protection of regional vegetation.
Whilst these threads can be construed as showing some positive continuity of
outcome over time, the history of the collections and the specimens within
them can also be shown to illustrate the ad hoc manner in which the Gardens
have developed. For instance, many specimens and collections have been
planted in the Gardens because they were available or donated to the
Gardens, others reflect the personal preferences of staff, still others result from
Chapter 2 The Development of the Living Collections 17
public or other unwise pressures to display the widest range of geographic and
taxonomic interests, all within the finite space available within the Gardens.
The discussions in the following sections reflect both these positive and
negative threads of continuity and suggest policies and directions that build on
the good whilst addressing the bad and indifferent.
3 . T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S T O D A Y
3 . 1 C A T E G O R I E S O F C O L L E C T I O N S
Today there are over 40 discrete living collections at the RTBG (Table 3.1)
including in-ground, potted nursery and seed bank collections comprised of
over 6000 species, varieties and cultivars7. The collections can be broadly
divided into four major categories of collections:
Tasmanian Collections
Conservation and Research Collections
Southern Hemisphere Collections: and
Cultural and Ornamental Collections.
Within these categories, collections can be sub-grouped based on their
principle focus, that is, whether they have a:
geographical basis – a collection of plants based on a
defined geographical area or biome;
taxonomic basis - a collection of plants that demonstrates
principles of plant classification;
demonstration purpose - a collection that displays
specialised areas of botanical or horticultural interest or
horticultural techniques;
heritage basis - a collection that exhibits a linkage with
historic periods, cultural events, people or horticultural
practices or periods; or
horticultural basis - a collection that is based on horticultural
selections of species or display principles.
7 Note, the RTBG has Memoranda of Understanding with the Emu Valley Rhododendron Garden and the Tasmanian Arboretum regarding the exchange of living materials. In the case of the latter, the RTBG maintain holding collections of some of plants at the Arboretum. These collections have not been considered, herein, but should be managed and/or developed in the future in line with the policies of the LCP and the strategic framework of the SMP.
20 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Category Focus Collection
Tasmanian Geographical Focus
Taxonomic Focus
Demonstration Focus
Heritage Focus
Horticultural Focus
Subantarctic
Greater Hobart
East Coast
Tasmanian
Foreshore
Remnant Grassland
Epacridaceae
Tasmanian Ferns
WSUD Garden
French Memorial
Visitor Centre Beds
Conservation and Research
Geographical Focus
Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre
Conservation Collections (Potted)
Southern Hemisphere Geographical Focus
Taxonomic Focus
Horticultural Focus
New Zealand
Gondwana Terraces
Southern Hemisphere (Potted)
Southern Hemisphere Conifers (Potted)
Protea
Cultural and Ornamental
Horticultural Focus
Taxonomic Focus
Demonstration Focus
Bedding plants - including Floral Clock
Conservatory
Deciduous Trees – (incl. Oak Woodland)
Conifer Cultivars
Mixed Border (Friends Border, Rills, Lily Pond, Iris)
Rhododendrons & Camellias
Fuchsia House
Palm Collection
Asian Woodland
Salvia Collection
Magnoliaceae
Grey Foliage plants
Eucalypt Lawn
Conifer Species
Herb Garden
Pete's Patch/Economic
Easy Access Garden
Cacti & Succulents
Cultural and Ornamental (cont.)
Heritage Focus
Geographical Focus
Heritage Apples
Significant Trees
Cottage Garden
Japanese Garden
Chinese
Australian
Table 3.1 The Collections of the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens
Chapter 3 The Living Collections Today 21
3 . 2 O V E R V I E W O F T H E C O L L E C T I O N S
The following provides a précis of the background to and content of the
principle collections within each of the four collection categories.
3.2.1 Tasmanian Collections
As noted, the inclusion of Tasmanian native species in the Gardens was
encouraged by Lieutenant Governor Arthur as early 1827 and in recent years
there has been a growing understanding of the need to display Tasmanian
flora. Starting with no more than a dozen native plants scattered around the
grounds in the 1980s, the Gardens today holds eleven identified collections
displaying Tasmanian native species.
Geographic Focus
Principle amongst the geographically focused collections are the Subantarctic
Collection and the Tasmanian Native Garden (1991) being significant
drawcards for visitors to the Gardens, the former unique in the world.
The Subantarctic Plant House, opened in 2000, displays the flora of Macquarie
and Heard Islands and is the only facility of its type in the world. The collection
consists of 25 of the 41 vascular plant species considered to be native to
Macquarie Island8 as well as 5 of the 11species occurring on Heard Island.
Because of its uniqueness, the collection has been extensively used for
research. There is a large interpretation sign before the entry to the House
and panels within the House discussing the vegetation zones on Macquarie
Island, and a brochure is also available.
The Tasmanian Native Garden was established from wild-sourced Tasmanian
species laid out in habitat types ranging from coastal to alpine. While the
original design is still largely followed, the plants in the alpine/sub-alpine
portion of the garden failed to thrive and have been replanted with wet forest
species. All told, the Tasmanian Native Garden holds about one fifth of
Tasmania’s vascular flora (~300 species). Interpretation within the Tasmanian
Native Garden focuses on the authors of the four Tasmanian ‘floras’ that have
been written since settlement. Ronald Campbell Gunn, an important colonial
Tasmanian plant collector is also featured on a panel and in a Plant Explorers
brochure developed by the Gardens.
The Greater Hobart collection was planted in 1999 and consists of native
species that grow in and around Hobart and its environs from Snug to New
Norfolk and Richmond to South Arm. Most of the collection has been
8 Macquarie Island is a Tasmanian state reserve and Tasmania’s second World Heritage Area.
22 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
propagated by the RTBG from wild-sourced material. It contains around 80
species, some of which overlap with those in the Tasmanian section. This is
the only native in-ground collection that has any interpretation of threatened
species with about half a dozen species having small signs. The origin of the
collection is also briefly interpreted.
The East Coast collection is wild-sourced. Established in 2002. the collection
contains species from the east coast of Tasmania and Flinders Island. It also
includes about 80 species, again with some overlap with the Tasmanian and
Greater Hobart collections. There is no interpretation.
The Foreshore was rehabilitated with locally collected native species in 2002
using a grant from the Australian Government Envirofund. The rehabilitation
involved the mass planting of a small number of species found growing on the
Derwent foreshore9. There are two small remnant pieces of partially degraded
vegetation between the new plantings.
The remnant of grassland at the northern tip of the Gardens is a de facto
collection remaining largely undeveloped since the earliest fencing of the site
apart from some very limited over-planting of exotic trees. Nonetheless, the
area has been disturbed leading to some weed infestation. Recent change to
the mowing regime has, however, encouraged local grassland species to
increase in number. This area is not well understood and needs to be properly
surveyed to determine which species occur there.
Taxonomic Focus
The Fern House (built in 1964) was replanted in 2002 with wild collected
Tasmanian fern species. About 40% (~40) of Tasmania’s fern species are
represented. There is no interpretation.
The Epacridaceae collection, established in separate beds from the
Tasmanian section in 1994, is heavily infected with Phytophthora. The
disease has had a greater impact on this collection than any other and it is
accepted that a cyclic replacement is needed for plants affected by the
disease. The planting is broadly based on species from dolerite, sandstone
and granite soil types, grouped together and generalists planted throughout.
About 40% of Tasmania’s Epacridaceae species (~40) are represented. There
is no interpretation of the collection.
9 In this light, the Foreshore could be considered a horticultural planting.
Chapter 3 The Living Collections Today 23
Heritage Focus
The French Fountain was redeveloped in 2004 using nursery-sourced stock to
present the plant species collected in Tasmania by the French explorers of the
early 19th century using Labillardiere’s notes and plant lists. There is a
recently designed interpretation panel to this effect (as well as a second older
panel).
Demonstration Focus
The WSUD Garden was largely planted with nursery-bought plants in 2005
and contains species which cope with periodic inundation. A fact sheet
available on the WSUD Garden is available.
Horticultural Focus
The Visitor Centre beds are largely planted with nursery-bought Tasmanian
species. These beds, planted in 1999, were initially intended to be comprised
of horticultural selections of Tasmanian species but this has only been carried
out to a limited extent in two beds.
3.2.2 Conservation and Research Collections
The Conservation and Research Collections are made up of two
geographically focused collections: the Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre
and the group of potted conservation collections.
Both collections are held in collaboration with a diverse group of organisations.
For instance, the RTBG has been listed as a participants in 9 of the 12
recovery plans prepared by the Threatened Species Section of DEPHA since
199610.
Both collections play an integrated role in this and other flora conservation
programs.
Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre
The Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre (TSCC) is a joint effort of the Royal
Botanic Gardens Kew, the Biodiversity Conservation Branch (BCB) of DPEHA,
the Tasmanian Herbarium (Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery) and the
RTBG.
The TSCC currently forms part of a global program known as the Millennium
Seed Bank Project, coordinated and funded in part by the Royal Botanical
10 Albeit, most recovery plans have not been implemented.
24 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Gardens Kew Millennium Seed Bank, and instigated in 2004 with funding until
2010. The aim of the project is to:
Collect and conserve seed from some 24,000 species,
principally from drylands, by 2010; and
Develop relationships worldwide to facilitate research,
training and capacity-building in order to support and
advance the seed conservation effort11.
At a local level, the Seed Bank project aims to provide a means of conserving
the biodiversity of Tasmania’s flora via:
Ex-situ support for plant conservation programs;
Seed material to assist in the scientific study of our native
plants; and
Long–term preservation of plant biodiversity loss caused by
environmental degradation12.
The Centre is managed by a coordinator, with seed collection undertaken by
staff from the Resource Management and Conservation Unit (DEPHA), plus
staff from the RTBG and volunteers. Volunteers also support staff in the
laboratory.
Seed from viable in-situ specimens is collected, cleaned, dried and sealed in
packages for storage at -20°C. Half of the seed is stored at the RTBG
laboratory, the other half is sent to the Royal Botanical Gardens Kew for
inclusion in the Millennium Seed Bank, providing a backup in the event that
one collection is damaged or destroyed. Seeds are to be stored for 200 years
or more.
The seed bank has set a date of 2010 to meet Target 8 of the Botanic
Gardens Conservation International’s Global Strategy for Plant Conservation.
Target 8 : “60% of the threatened plant species in accessible ex-situ
collections, preferably in the country of origin, and 10 per cent of them
included in recovery and restoration programs.”
At the time of this writing, the TSCC had already collected 486 Tasmanian
native taxa since its inception in August 2005 and holds seed of 92 species
listed as threatened (21% of the total). Seed of some threatened species is
notoriously difficult to collect due to a number of factors. These include the 11 MSB project aim sourced from the ‘Seed Safe – helping to Secure a Biodiverse Future’ brochure, produced by the RTBG. 12 The aim of the Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre has been sourced from the RTBG website.
Chapter 3 The Living Collections Today 25
degree of rarity – some species have very small populations or are poor seed
producers in the first place (e.g. Tetratheca gunnii) or often it is simply the
logistics of getting to remote places when the seed is ripe.
To overcome these limiting factors, the RTBG has produced potted specimens
of selected species to act as seed orchards (see Potted Conservation
Collection).
Ultimately, the seed bank will be the RTBG’s most effective conservation
instrument, although funding for the activities of the Centre is only secured up
until 2010 after which time alternative sources of funding may need to be
found.
The TSCC has only been interpreted by the RTBG through a single brochure
that gives a background to the collection. The TSCC will shortly release a
data base of its seed germination information via a website.
Potted Conservation Collections
The Potted Conservation Collection has been established in collaboration with
the Threatened Species Section of DEPHA and others and acts both as an
insurance against the loss of species in the wild and, in some cases, provides
material for translocation back into the wild13.
The RTBG currently maintains six threatened species in potted collections. All
of the species are at the highest level of risks on state (endangered under the
Threatened Species Protection Act 1995) and/or federal (critically endangered
under the environmental Protection Biodiversity and Conservation Act 1999)
registers.
Most of the potted collection has been propagated from cuttings and each is
maintained on a cyclic program of re-propagation to ensure there is viable
material for re-propagation. The maintenance of such collections requires a
considerable degree of effort in terms of propagation and maintenance of the
pots, as well as using up space on the Nursery benches.
An example of one species in the collection is the Davies Wax Flower,
Phebalium daviesii, which was listed as extinct until about 40 plants were re-
discovered growing near St Helens in 1990. The RTBG establishad an ex-situ
collection in 1995 and now holds 26 genotypes. The wild population has since
suffered losses and less than 20 genotypes now exist in the wild.
13 For instance, plants from the RTBG’s collection of Shy Susan (Tetratheca gunnii) have been returned to the wild in collaboration with the Threatened Species Section of DEPHA.
26 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
The seed dormancy of members of the plant family Rutaceae, to which Davies
Wax Flower belongs, is often problematic, meaning that the original collection
had to be established from cuttings. The advent of the Tasmanian Seed
Conservation Centre and its associated research into the germination of
Tasmanian native species could result in positive conservation outcomes for
species such as this.
At the time of writing, eight threatened species were being maintained in pots
for the purpose of creating seed orchards (see above). Six in the Nursery and
two by volunteers from the Understorey Network.
King’s Lomatia, Lomatia tasmanica, by comparison, is a sterile clone that does
not produce seed and it has proven particularly difficult to propagate using
traditional vegetative means. The RTBG, therefore, uses its collection of this
species to collaborate with the Plant Science Department of the University of
Tasmania to secure its future through tissue culture propagation.
3.2.3 Southern Hemisphere Collections
The Southern Hemisphere Collections are made up of the Southern
Hemisphere conifers (potted), the New Zealand collection and in-ground and
potted Gondwanan plants.
Whilst the New Zealand collection has a considerable historic background14
and is a major component of the Southern Hemisphere collections, the
emphasis on Southern Hemisphere and Gondwana species collections more
generally is a more recent development in the Gardens.
For instance, a conscious effort was made to build up a Southern Hemisphere
Conifer Collection in the late 1990s with donations from researchers at the
University of Tasmania. The collection is largely in pots and, therefore,
nursery based due to a lack of in-ground space15.
In recent years, the Gardens has received further donations of other conifers
and associated Gondwana species, the potted Southern Hemisphere conifer
collection now comprising over 60 species of the 160 species which are
restricted to the Southern Hemisphere. Half of these are listed as rare and
threatened under the IUCN red list and many are extremely rare in cultivation.
New Caledonia, the hot spot for southern conifers has 43 species, and the
RTBG holds roughly 50% of these.
14 First displayed under Newman the mid 19th century, and extolled in the early 20th century in a proposed Gardens’ walk by Superintendent John Wardman) (see Section 2.1). 15 A proposal to house the collection at the nearby Beaumaris Zoo site in 2003 which would have overcome this lack of space was not accepted (see Section 4 Issues for further discussions about the lack of space for expansion of collections within the Gardens). Note also, that a replicate set of these plants is held by the Tasmanian Arboretum.
Chapter 3 The Living Collections Today 27
The in-ground Gondwana collection has utilised the Gondwana Terraces
(north of the Anniversary Arch and below the Lily Pond). In recent years,
selections in this area have been supplemented by plantings of provenanced
Nothofagus species but much of the earlier planting in the terrace has been
poorly maintained and is in a substandard condition. Gondwanan species are
also held in pots augmenting the Southern Hemisphere conifer collection.
3.2.4 Cultural and Ornamental Collections
The diversity of the Cultural and Ornamental Collections reflects the varied
historical development of the Gardens and the eclectic botanical interests of its
employees and include groupings across all foci of collecting.
Geographical Focus
The major geographically focused collections are the Japanese Garden and
the Chinese Collection.
Although the Japanese Garden has some elements of a traditional Japanese
garden such as water features, bridges and a small-scale model of Mt Fuji, it
has never been maintained using conventional Japanese horticultural
techniques.
The Chinese plant section is a fully provenanced collection. To ensure the
focus is on the plant collection, the setting incorporates traditional garden
elements (stone lions, paving and balustrades) but has not been specifically
designed to represent a Chinese style of gardening.
Taxonomic Focus
C O N I F E R C O L L E C T I O N
The cultivation of conifers has been a strong focus throughout the history of
the RTBG. The early lithograph from Dumont D’Urville’s 1839-40 voyage seen
on the cover of this report, for instance, shows a Norfolk Island Pine in the
foreground and by the 1857 catalogue there were 135 conifer species listed as
growing in the Gardens16.
Today the Conifer Collection is a composite of the Conifer Cultivars Collection
and Southern Hemisphere Conifer collections and conifer species that do not
fall into either of these collections. In toto the Conifer Collection includes 230
species of conifer including 60 of the 69 extant genera of conifers in the world
and 60 of the 160 conifer species restricted to the Southern Hemisphere.
16 The 1857 catalogue was compiled by Newman courtesy of the Royal Society and is likely to be quite accurate.
28 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
There are also 230 horticultural selections of conifers in the Conifer Cultivar
Collection.
Amongst the species represented, some are extremely rare in cultivation. The
RTBG specimens of Chilgoza Pine and Pinus gerardiana are purported to be 3
of only 6 growing in Australia17. As noted, half of the species held in the potted
Southern Hemisphere Collection are listed as rare or threatened on the IUCN
red list and are extremely rare in cultivation.
The importance of the Conifer Collection is further highlighted by the inclusion
of 35 trees in the Significant Trees Collection (see below).
The extent and diversity of the collections and the rarity of some of the species
within it, then, makes the Conifer Collection one of the most significant
collections of conifers in the southern hemisphere18.
In addition to its botanical and conservation values, the Conifer Collection
contributes to the strong Gardenesque character of parts of the Gardens.
Indeed, conifers, particularly the Norfolk Island Pine, figure prominently in the
record of images of the Gardens as a strong and defining element of the place.
The conifer collection more generally forms a visual break between the
Gardens and the more natural areas of the Domain.
Historically, the RTBG also has a prominent history in the worldwide
distribution of the Norfolk Island Pine, much of the world’s early stock in
cultivation having been sourced from propagules from the Gardens in the
19th century.
Within Australia, Tasmania is the state climatically best suited for conifer
cultivation but in terms of longevity of species, the RTBG collection is relatively
young with the oldest specimens being less than 200 years old. For example
the Big Tree, Sequoiadendron giganteum, is estimated to have a lifespan of up
to 4000 years and the tallest recorded stands at 83.8m. In comparison, the
RTBG’s largest specimen, planted in the 1880s, is 36m. Sequoiadendron
giganteum was a popular planting in Australian parks in the1860s and 1870s
but many specimens interstate are now suffering crown dieback probably from
adverse environmental conditions.
The lifespan of mature specimens in the Conifer Species collection is difficult
to predict, in part due to the lack of prior experience in the cultivation of these
17 Note, these trees do not seem to produce viable seed and if it was decided the trees should be replaced at the end of their lives, the lack of viable seed could be problematical. 18 In reality, there are few conifer collections in the Southern Hemisphere including a few in New Zealand, some relatively small collections in South Africa, Argentina and Uruguay. So there is little competition to this claim.
Chapter 3 The Living Collections Today 29
species under local Tasmanian conditions. Four of the larger specimens have
required cabling, and limb drop has been a problem in some species during
strong winds or after hot weather.
Despite the world importance of the Conifer Collection there is no in-ground
interpretation to this effect.
Demonstration
The demonstration collections include Pete’s Patch and the Easy Access
Garden.
Pete’s Patch has been the centerpiece used by ABC Television’s Gardening
Australia presenter, Peter Cundall, to demonstrate the workings of a backyard
organic vegetable garden. The program has been a drawcard for visitors with
many specifically asking where Pete’s Patch is on arrival. Peter’s recent
retirement from the show will likely result in a shift in priorities for the ABC and
how it makes use of the RTBG as a backdrop to its various set pieces.
The Community Garden program is based in the Easy Access Garden with its
raised beds, but the program utilizes a number of other collections including
the Herb Garden. Whilst use of the Easy Access Gardens is high, it is seldom
used for the purposes which it was originally intended (i.e. for gardening by
disabled people in wheelchairs).
Heritage Focus
The principle collection with a heritage focus is the Significant Tree Collection.
Other groups with a similar focus include the Cottage Garden and the Heritage
Apples Collections.
S I G N I F I C A N T T R E E S C O L L E C T I O N
The RTBG currently has 63 living entries on the National Trust of Tasmania’s
Register of Significant Trees. This includes 61 individual trees and 2
collections (the Oaks and Palms) totalling 105 specimens in all19.
The National Trust’s Register records trees of special significance within the
state. To qualify for inclusion, trees must fall into one of at least 10 categories.
This includes trees of outstanding aesthetic significance, trees that
commemorate particular individuals or events, trees that are rare in cultivation
and trees that are old or of venerable age. Category 6 refers to tree(s) that
19 Like the Conifer Collection, individual trees may be included in more than one collection. For instance, the conifers listed as significant trees are also included in the Conifer Collection, the oaks as part of the Deciduous Tree Collection, the palms and part of the Palm Collection, etc.
30 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
are an important part of an historic site or garden, or a park or town, and in
theory all the ~2500 plants in the Gardens over 3m tall fall into this category.
Nonetheless, those on the Register warrant special mention, particularly for
their contribution to the historic Gardensque qualities of the RTBG landscape.
Placement on the Register does not impose any legal requirement to preserve
the tree but the RTBG is listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Register (Identifier
No. 2927). The Tasmanian Heritage Register does impose statutory
requirements with regard to historic plantings. Practice Notes 13 –The
Approval Process for Historic Plantings states that approval must be sought for
substantial works that may shorten the life of a tree or for removals. Practice
Note 14 – The Long Term Maintenance of Historic Plantings discusses factors
to be assessed when making replacement plantings.
The diversity of the Significant Tree Collection is evident in the range of
specimens on the Register. These range from the 3m tall Anchor Plant,
Colletia paradoxa, which has been listed due to its rarity in cultivation, to the
Big Tree, Sequoiadendron giganteum which has been listed for its size, age
and aesthetic beauty.
The Significant Tree Collection has been valued using the Thyer Tree
Valuation Method, based on factors such as the age, size and condition of the
tree and the significance of the tree in the landscape. The 105 specimens that
make up the collection were valued at over $4,800,00020. Individual valuations
range from around $4000 for the Anchor Plant to $152,000 for the Big Tree.
Each tree in the Significant Tree Collection has a special label identifying that
it is on the Register. A brochure for a Significant Trees Walk is also available.
Horticultural Focus
Collections with a horticultural focus typically hold a high amenity value and
include the Conservatory and Bedding plants and the recently refurbished
Friends Mixed Border. The Rhododendron and Camellia Collection provides
mass colour in late winter and spring, and like a number of other collections is
dispersed across the Gardens, rather than restricted to a single area. The
Salvia Collection flowers from spring through to autumn and is optimally
placed to be seen at its best advantage from the Restaurant above..
20 Note, the Thyer valuation method was extrapolated across the whole of the tree collection in the Gardens of 1400 specimens, with the total worth of the tree collection being $27.5 million dollars. A calculation of tree losses between 1996 and 2006 (about 200 trees including the Armillaria eradication) indicated that trees to the value of $3.8 million were lost from the collection at the time. More recently the blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) removed from the lower Gardens was valued at $105,000.
Chapter 3 The Living Collections Today 31
The Deciduous Tree Collection is likewise dispersed throughout the Gardens.
The Oak Woodland is a major focus, particularly in autumn.
4 . T H E V A L U E O F T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S
4 . 1 T H E C O N T R I B U T I O N O F T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S T O
T H E V A L U E S O F T H E R T B G
At the broadest over-arching level, the living collections form the raison d’etre
for the Gardens. The values of the Gardens in toto, including the living
collections, have been described in detail in the Royal Tasmanian Botanical
Gardens Strategic Master Plan 2008-202821 (SMP) and include:
remnant natural biological values;
cultural values including Aboriginal heritage values, historic
heritage values, landscape values and sense of place
values;
recreation, tourism and education values; and
conservation and research values.
The living collections as a whole, contribute to each of these values in a
variety of ways. For instance, the Gardens include areas of remnant native
vegetation (albeit extremely limited in extent) and elsewhere holds plants that
were once used by Aboriginal people for a variety of purposes. These areas
and plants are, therefore, important to the contemporary Aboriginal community
for the linkages they provide to their rich culture.
The living collections also contribute to the heritage values of the RTBG as
artifacts of the historic development of the site from its earliest beginnings as a
subsistence colony to its contemporary role in global conservation and the
exchange of scientific knowledge.
At a regional level, the living collections are readily identifiable in the
landscape of the City as an “oasis of green” in the local population’s
perception of the image of their city and a “lush” relief from the dry continent
for interstate and international visitors. At a detailed level, the living collections
are the basis for the beauty of the Gardens. The Gardens also give visual
delight to all who come and form a refuge where some seek peace with
themselves and the world. The vegetation of the Gardens also frames views
from the RTBG to the wider landscape, creating scenes of great beauty.
21 Inspiring Place 2008. ibid.
34 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Importantly, the living collections contribute to the uniqueness of living in
Hobart and Tasmania: to its sense of place. That is, the living collections can
help people define the uniqueness of this place, which in turn contributes to
their self-definition as Hobartians, Tasmanians or citizens of the world.
The living collections as a whole also have considerable value for their
recreation, tourism and educational values that act as a backdrop of great
beauty or as point of difference to encourage visitation. The living collections
also provide open learning opportunities and act as a focus for specific
educational programs.
The conservation and research value of the living collections is evidenced by
the high degree of technical achievement in the establishment of over 6000
species, varieties and cultivars of plants, held in 45 identifiable collections
amongst which are:
collections of international significance including the
Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre, the Conifer
Collection and the potted Southern Hemisphere Collection;
collections of 12 species of exceptional significance for their
rarity as recognised by the Threatened Species Protection
Act 1995 and the Environmental Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999;
individual specimens of over 100 of the 400 threatened
species listed under the Threatened Species Protection Act
1995 and others of internationally rare and/or endangered
species:
~30 species listed as threatened under the IUCN Red List;
and
105 trees listed on the National Trust Register of Significant
Trees.
Chapter 4 The Value of the Living Collections 35
4 . 2 T H E V A L U E O F I N D I V I D U A L C O L L E C T I O N S
Whilst an understanding of the value of the living collections as a whole is
illuminating, a more detailed consideration of the individual collections is
required if the Gardens is to achieve its greatest value.
4.2.1 Method of Assessing Individual Collections
As noted, there are 45 individual living collections within the Gardens each
with varying degrees of importance to its value.
To understand the value of the 45 collections in the Gardens, a unique method
of assessing them was developed as part of the planning for the master
planning project22 and refined during the preparation of the RTBG Living
Collections Plan.
This section describes the methods used in determining the value of the
individual Living Collections.
Note that the assessment reflects the views of the RTBG Living Collections
Working Group of the value of the collections at February 2008 and does not
take into account any latent potential. Some of the collections with low scores
have the potential for development against one or more of the attributes and in
some cases minimal change could add significant value to a collection. On the
other hand, a low score may indicate that a collection is not relevant to the
future directions of the RTBG.
Attribute Classes
Living collections have a range of attributes that can be used to distinguish
one collection from another. These attributes can be clustered into three
principle attribute classes:
Defining attributes or those that define what it means to be
the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens [consultant’s
emphasis] (i.e. the relevance to the region’s flora and those
collections with historical significance to the Gardens) or
those attributes that more generally define a botanic garden
including plants having conservation or botanical attributes
of interest.
22 See Strategic Master Plan Request for Tender – Stage 2 Version 5, 05.10.05.
36 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Use attributes or those that relate to the ways that a
collection is interpreted and used by both the public and the
RTBG itself. These are seen to include interpretive,
educational, tourism, commercial and spiritual
considerations.
Managerial attributes or those that relate to the amenity
aspects of a collection and the suitability of local conditions
for the collection. These are seen to include horticultural
and site suitability considerations.
Attribute Rating Criteria
Each of the three attribute classes was then further distinguished by a range of
specific considerations against which they were assessed for their value.
Table 4.1 shows each of the attribute classes, their distinguishing attributes
and the assessment criteria for each of these.
Scoring Against Attributes
Each attribute was then scored on a scale from 1 to 5 against the criteria with
a score of 1 representing collections that did not meet or poorly met the listed
criteria for that attribute and 5 for those that met the criteria well. The scores
were then weighted by multiplying the Defining Attributes x 3, Use Attributes x
1.5 and managerial Attributes x 1.
The weighting gives:
an emphasis to the defining values as these represent the
principle reason for the continued existence of the Gardens
(as opposed to say, converting the area to a park);
a lesser emphasis to the use benefits, in part to balance the
effect of the total tally of benefits, given the number of
attributes grouped in this class; and
a base rating to the managerial attributes as these are a
fundamental to any botanic garden.
Chapter 4 The Value of the Living Collections 37
Class of Attributes
Attribute Assessment Criteria
Defining
Regional
collections with valid connections to our region;
collections that are Tasmanian in origin (including Macquarie island);
collections that are Australian in origin;
collections that have a southern hemisphere distribution; and
collections with Gondwana origins.
Conservation
viable potted and seed ex-situ collections;
collections of Tasmanian species that are listed on the IUCN Red List and/or under the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1955 and/or the Federal Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999;
ex-situ potted and seed collections with a representative number of genotypes from within or between population/s; and
collections of listed species in DPWI Threatened Species Recovery Plans.
Botanical
collections with scientific integrity;
collections of known wild provenance;
collections with detailed field collection records;
collections with herbarium voucher specimens; and
collections based on taxonomic principles with a comprehensive representation of taxa.
Historical
collections originating from or representing the heritage fabric of the Gardens or elements of Tasmania’s botanical history;
the mature canopy of trees originating from Victorian plantings;
the Gardenesque Victorian elements in the landscape such as the palms;
plantings based on records of early plant lists from the RTBG; and
collections relating to Tasmania’s botanical history.
Use
Interpretive
collections currently covered by interpretive media other than plant labels;
collections with in-ground interpretive signage;
collections with associated pamphlets;
collections interpreted in RTBG displays; and
collections interpreted on the RTBG web site.
Educational
collections currently used for education purposes;
collections used for the schools program;
collections used for the community garden program; and
collections used for Green Thumbs and Explore programs.
Tourism
collections that specifically draw tourists to the RTBG;
collections that are unique to the RTBG such as the Subantarctic Plant House and Tasmanian collections;
collections of high ornamental value such as the Conservatory; and
collections centred on events such as the Tulip Festival.
Commercial
income generating collections;
collections used as sites to for income generating activities such as weddings, naming ceremonies and memorials and other functions; and
collections providing material for income generating activities such as plant sales.
Spiritual
collections that have spiritual associations (Note: this attribute was not assessed due to the difficulty and costs of gaining information about reliable indicators).
Managerial
Horticultural
collections with high amenity value;
collections with strong visual appeal;
collections displaying a range of horticultural selections; and
collections that display current trends in horticulture.
38 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Class of Attributes
Attribute Assessment Criteria
Site Suitability23
local environmental and artificial factors which influence the cultivation of collections;
soil type and drainage;
water availability and type of irrigation;
slope and aspect;
local climate;
adjacent plants; and
adjoining infrastructure.
Table 4.1 Attribute Classes, Attributes and Assessment Criteria
4.2.2 The Results - The Values of Individual Living Collections
Table 4.2 shows the findings of the assessment process. Within the table
attributes have been rated 1-5 and sub-totals have been provided for each
attribute class and then a total score for each collection.
In terms of the attributes that were assessed, the table indicates that amongst:
all classes:
the Sub-Antarctic collection (68.5), the Tasmanian
Native Garden (67.5), the Tasmanian Seed
Conservation Centre (66), the Potted Conservation
Collection (62.5) and the Conifer Species Collection
(62) have the highest overall ratings followed by the
plants of the Conservatory (57), Greater Hobart
(55.5) and the Tasmanian Ferns (55);
the Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre) (48) and
the Potted Conservation Collections (48) , have the
highest ratings in terms of defining the Gardens
followed in order by more moderately rated
collections including the Tasmanian Native Garden,
the Greater Hobart Garden and the East Coast
Garden (39) and the Sub-Antarctic, Tasmanian
Ferns, Epacridacea and the Potted Southern
Hemisphere Collections (36);
23 Poor site suitability is, in part, evidenced by negative factors such as the cost of maintaining a collection including the labour, energy or watering intensity required for its maintenance.
Chapter 4 The Value of the Living Collections 39
Use Classes
the plantings of the Conservatory (30) have the
highest rating for its use attributes followed by
Pete’s Patch and the Japanese Gardens (27); and
Managerial Classes
the Conservatory and the Mixed Border (9) have the
highest rating for their managerial attributes
followed by a large cluster of collections rated 8.
Looking at the attributes individually, the horticultural and site suitability
attributes rate highest (122 and 128 respectively), reflecting the skill of the
RTBG staff in establishing and maintaining the Gardens.
The table reveals that the RTBG’s regional (112) and botanical values (104)
along with its educational values (87) and tourism values (84) achieved more
modest ratings.
Collection
Reg
ion
al
Co
nse
rvat
ion
Bo
tan
ical
His
tori
cal
Su
b-T
ota
l (w
eig
hte
d b
y 3,
hig
hes
t p
oss
ible
sc
ore
60)
Inte
rpre
tati
on
Ed
uca
tio
nal
Tou
rism
Rec
reat
ion
al
Co
mm
erci
al
Sp
irit
ual
Su
b-T
ota
l (w
eig
hte
d b
y 1.
5, h
igh
est
po
ssib
le
sco
re 3
7.5)
Ho
rtic
ult
ura
l
Sit
e S
uit
abili
ty
Man
agem
ent
Su
b-T
ota
l (u
nw
eig
hte
d,
hig
hes
t p
oss
ible
sco
re
10)
Ove
rall
Sco
res
(ou
t o
f 10
7.5)
TASMANIAN
Geographical FocusSubantarctic 5 1 5 1 36 5 5 5 1 1 25.5 4 3 7 68.5Tasmanian Native Garden 5 1 5 2 39 3 5 5 1 1 22.5 3 3 6 67.5Greater Hobart 5 2 5 1 39 3 1 1 1 1 10.5 3 3 6 55.5East Coast 5 2 5 1 39 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 3 3 6 52.5Foreshore 5 2 3 1 33 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 1 4 5 45.5Remnant Grassland 3 2 3 1 27 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 1 4 5 39.5Taxonomic FocusTasmanian Ferns 5 1 5 1 36 1 3 2 1 1 12 4 3 7 55Epacridaceae 5 1 5 1 36 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 2 1 3 46.5Demonstration FocusWSUD Garden 5 1 1 1 24 3 2 1 1 1 12 2 1 3 39Heritage FocusFrench Memorial 4 1 3 3 33 3 1 1 2 1 12 3 3 6 51Horticultural FocusVisitor Centre Beds 5 1 3 1 30 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 3 3 6 43.5CONSERVATION & RESEARCHGeographical FocusTasmanian Seed Conservation Centre 5 5 5 1 48 2 3 1 1 1 12 1 5 6 66Conservation Collections (Potted) 5 5 5 1 48 1 2 2 1 1 10.5 1 3 4 62.5SOUTHERN HEMISPHEREGeographical Focus
Southern Hemisphere (Potted) 4 3 4 1 36 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 2 1 3 46.5
New Zealand 4 1 1 4 30 1 2 1 1 1 9 2 3 5 44
Gondwana Terraces 4 1 3 1 27 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 3 3 6 40.5
Taxonomic FocusSouthern Hemisphere Conifers (Potted) 4 3 3 1 33 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 2 1 3 43.5Horticultural FocusProtea 1 1 1 1 12 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 1 3 4 23.5CULTURAL & ORNAMENTALGeographical FocusJapanese Garden 1 1 1 1 12 2 3 5 4 4 27 4 3 7 46Chinese 1 1 4 1 21 2 2 3 2 1 15 4 4 8 44Australian 4 1 1 1 21 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 1 2 3 31.5Taxonomic FocusConifer Species 1 1 4 5 33 1 4 3 3 3 21 4 4 8 62Eucalypt Lawn 5 1 1 1 24 1 1 1 3 1 10.5 3 3 6 40.5Demonstration FocusPete's Patch/Economic 1 1 1 1 12 3 5 5 2 3 27 4 4 8 47Easy Access Garden 1 1 1 1 12 1 5 1 4 5 24 2 2 4 40Herb Garden 1 1 1 1 12 3 3 3 2 1 18 3 4 7 37
Cacti & Succulents 1 1 3 1 18 2 5 1 1 1 15 3 1 4 37
Heritage FocusSignificant Trees 1 1 1 3 18 3 3 2 3 1 18 4 4 8 44Cottage Garden 1 1 1 5 24 2 1 1 1 1 9 4 4 8 41Heritage Apples 3 1 1 1 18 1 2 1 1 1 9 2 2 4 31Horticultural FocusConservatory 1 1 1 3 18 2 3 5 5 5 30 5 4 9 57Bedding plants - including Floral Clock 1 1 1 4 21 1 1 5 1 5 19.5 5 3 8 48.5Deciduous Trees – (elms and oaks) 1 1 1 2 15 1 3 4 3 3 21 3 3 6 42Palm collection 1 1 2 4 24 1 1 1 2 1 9 3 4 7 40Fuchsia House 1 1 3 2 21 1 1 3 1 1 10.5 3 4 7 38.5Mixed Border (Friends Border,Rills, Lily Pond, Iris)
1 1 1 1 12 3 2 3 2 1 16.5 5 4 9 37.5
Salvia Collection 1 1 3 1 18 1 2 2 1 1 10.5 4 4 8 36.5Magnoliaceae 1 1 2 1 15 1 1 1 1 3 10.5 3 3 6 31.5Rhododendrons & Camellias 1 1 2 1 15 1 1 2 1 1 9 3 2 5 29Grey Foliage plants 1 1 1 1 12 1 2 1 1 1 9 4 4 8 29Asian Woodland 1 1 1 1 12 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 3 3 6 25.5Conifer Cultivars 1 1 1 1 12 1 1 1 1 1 7.5 2 3 5 24.5Sub-Total 112 58 104 68 68 87 84 66 65 122 128Possible Total 210 210 210 210 60 210 210 210 210 210 37.5 210 210 10 107.5
Table 4.2 Assessment of the Living Collections
Use Attributes Managerial AttributesDefinining Attributes
5 I S S U E S A R I S I N G F O R T H E M A N A G E M E N T O F T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S
Previous sections highlighted:
the importance of the living collections as the core business
of the RTBG, around which most all other roles and
functions, including interpretation, education and marketing
are based; and
the diversity of the collections, ranging from those of
historical significance, to contemporary collections
emphasising Tasmanian species, cool climate Southern
Hemisphere species and species of conservation
significance; and
the values which arise from the living collections and the
strengths of particular collections across a range of
attributes.
Prior discussion also indicated the lack of a clear direction for the development
of the collections in the absence of an agreed strategic framework for the
Gardens.
This section, then, addresses how the management of the collections into the
future will achieve the vision, mission, goals, policy framework and interpretive
themes of the Gardens (the strategic framework) as set out in the Royal
Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Strategic Master Plan 2008-2028.
Three clusters of issues will need to be addressed including those:
arising from the adoption of the vision, mission, goals,
policy framework and interpretive themes adopted by the
Strategic Master Plan (Section 5.1);
identified by the analysis of the collections against their
various attributes (Section 5.2); and
concerning matters of day to day operations and the
management of flora and plant collections (Section 5.3).
42 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
5 . 1 I S S U E S I N R E L A T I O N T O T H E V I S I O N , M I S S I O N ,
G O A L S A N D P O L I C Y F R A M E W O R K O F T H E S M P
The living collections are the principle means through which the vision,
mission, goals and interpretive themes of the Strategic Master Plan will be
expressed (see Attachment A). The issues arising from the adoption of this
strategic direction include:
Issue 1 Focus of the Collections
Analysis of the collections indicates there is a disconnection between many of
the existing collections and the mission, objectives, goals and interpretation
themes that are stated in the SMP.
There is a need, then, to focus collections on Tasmanian species, related cool
climate species from the Southern Hemisphere and/or species of conservation
significance whilst continuing to manage some areas of the Gardens for their
heritage values (including setting).
The assessment of the living collections (described in Section 4.2) shows the
strengths and weaknesses of each collection in relation this new strategic
focus (see Section 5.2). By contrast the assessment also shows the great
benefits to be gained by bringing the collections into alignment with the
strategic direction of the SMP. For instance, the Sub-Antarctic collection and
the Tasmanian Native Garden rate highly as regional and botanical collections
and in turn draw high ratings against their interpretation, education and tourism
attributes indicating the degree to which the Gardens has capitalised on the
unique attributes of these collections.
Issue 2 Lack of Clear Policies – Establishing New Collections
There is a lack of a clear policy position relating to the establishment of new
collections and/or the renewal or removal of existing collections. As noted
above, collections have been largely developed in an ad hoc or opportunistic
manner. The development of clearer policies herein (Section 6) will provide
greater direction and certainty to decision makers about where and how to
develop the collections more in line with the strategic directions of the SMP
(Section 7).
Chapter 5 Management Issues 43
Issue 3 Lack of Clear Policies – De-Accession
The lack of clear policies has also resulted in uncertainty about the de-
accession of plants and collections.
At the broad level, it is recognised that whole collections and/or individual
plants may have little value to the vision, mission, goals or interpretive themes
and take up valuable space that might be put to better use.
At the specific level, there is a great deal of uncertainty about how to manage
mature tree senescence. This is particularly important given there is a large
number of mature trees in the Significant Trees and Conifer collections that
are within the same age cohort and have heritage significance. Furthermore,
many of these could reach the end of their life span within a similar time frame,
and leave large open spaces, changing the historical landscape of the Garden,
and potentially having an impact on the perceptions of visitors and the
reputation of the RTBG24.
It is important, therefore, to have guidance as to which species, or plantings
should replace these trees when the decision is made that they should be
removed and more broadly how irrelevant collections might be removed or
renewed to bring greater benefit to the Gardens .
Issue 4 Lack of Botanical Integrity
As mentioned, the often serendipitous manner in which specimens have been
chosen or collections developed means that few of the existing collections are
of a known provenance. Known provenance is scientifically and historically
important and critical to gardens that seek to meet high conservation
standards such as the RTBG. Consideration will need to be given, then, to
developing collections or replacing collections with materials that are
accurately sourced.
In saying this, it is important to note that there are difficulties surrounding the
importation of living materials that will make achievement of this aim more
problematic in the future than it might once have been (see Section 5.3,
Quarantine).
24 N.B. The time frame in which various tree species will senesce is uncertain, as there is not enough available data about the lifespan of trees in cultivation relative to those in their natural setting. In some cases, the time periods could be 50+ years or more.
44 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Issue 5 Lack of Space
As mentioned the Gardens has a finite area in which to express its vision. At
present there is little space that can be readily be used to develop new
collections or to expand collections that meet the strategic framework for the
Gardens.
For instance, the Southern Hemisphere Collection has been held in pots since
1998. Ideally the collection would be planted as a whole in a single location.
However, if there is no opportunity to secure ground to plant the whole
collection, it may be necessary to split the collection into related parts and
plant them in several locations or to consider using the individual species as
replacement plantings for mature conifers as they die.
The Tasmanian category of collections is a good example where the lack of
space limits the capacity of these collections to grow. For instance, in an ideal
situation, the Gardens would hold a representative sample of all of the
eucalypts found in Tasmania (30 species), instead only seven are held as in
ground specimens.
Presently, the Tasmanian category collections range in area from 100m2 for
the Water Sensitive Urban Design Garden (WSUD) to 750m2 for the
Tasmanian Native Garden and with the other collections in this category
occupy only 2.5% of the Gardens proper.
Efforts to find space are hampered by existing collections about which there is
no clear policy or rationale for removal (see above) and/or the extent of area
occupied by collections of known significance. It will be important, therefore,
to identify those areas within the Gardens where new collections might be
developed, where existing collections might be renewed and/or where
collections might be wholly removed to better address the strategic directions
of the SMP.
Chapter 5 Management Issues 45
5 . 2 I S S U E S I D E N T I F I E D B Y T H E E V A L U A T I O N O F T H E
C O L L E C T I O N S
At the broad level, the analysis of the collections shows the relatively low total
scores achieved by any one collection, the highest rating collections amassing
only slightly more than half of the available score – this suggests room for
across the board improvement in even the most highly valued of the
collections.
More specifically there is a need to:
strengthen the defining attributes in each of the collections if
the Gardens is to clearly differentiate itself from other
botanic gardens (Issue 6);
gain greater return from the collections in terms of their use
benefits (Issue 7); and
better interpret the collections as the principle means of
deriving greater benefit from them (Issue 8).
Issue 6 Strengthening the Defining Attributes – Making the Most of the Points of Difference
In looking at the attribute classes, the analysis revealed relatively low scores
for the definitional attributes against their total possible scores with none of the
attribute sets reaching 50% of their possible score. These low results indicate
great scope to do better in matching the collections to the strategic direction
for the Gardens.
In particular, the collections scored:
only moderately well against the regional and botanical
attributes suggesting the need to strengthen the
representation of Tasmanian species and associated cool
climate Southern Hemisphere plants in the Gardens and the
botanical integrity of collections, particularly in the Cultural
and Ornamental collections category;
very low against the conservation attribute (the lowest score
of any attribute) indicating the degree to which much
greater conservation value needs to be injected into the
collections as whole if the Gardens is to meet its mission;
and
46 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
the relatively low score against the heritage attribute overall
and the concentration of higher scores against a few key
collections which indicates that the heritage values of the
Gardens are located in specific collections and areas rather
than being a feature of the Gardens as a whole.
Issue 7 Limited Return from Collections
The relatively low scores across all of the use attributes suggest that the
Gardens is not getting enough ‘return’ on its investment. At a broad level, the
Tasmanian, Conservation and Research and Southern Hemisphere categories
of collections scored lowly against use attributes. In particular, there are no
use benefits derived from these collections suggesting a potentially untapped
resource for garnering additional value from the Gardens.
The scores also show that there is no direct correlation between high scores
for definitional attributes and high returns in terms of use. For instance, there
is a strong disconnection between the high definitional scores of the
Conservation and Research Collections and their low scores against their use
attributes. The same is true for the Tasmanian Ferns and the Epacridaceae.
Together, this suggests that many ‘point of difference’ collections are not being
‘used’ in any significant way resulting in a loss of benefits to the Gardens. By
comparison great benefits are derived from the Sub-Antarctic and Tasmanian
collections, albeit these could generate greater value if approached differently.
Alternatively, strong scores against use attributes do not necessarily correlate
with strong definitional values. Here, the Cultural and Ornamental category of
collections is a good example, scoring much more highly against use attributes
than definitional ones. This situation is particularly evident in cultural and
ornamental collections with a demonstration focus (such as the Cacti and
Succulent collection and the Easy Access Garden). These collections bring a
range of benefits across a number of attributes but have almost no relationship
to the key defining attributes of the Gardens. This suggests that these
collections could be adapted to better represent the mission of the Gardens if
this did not result in a loss of return or reduced in scale to allow other more
appropriate development to occur.
The scores also show some interesting results including:
the low ranking of the recreational attributes of the Gardens
which suggests that the recreational benefits are not
derived so much from the collections themselves but from
the spatial qualities they produce as a setting for recreation;
Chapter 5 Management Issues 47
the correlation between the collections that produced low or
moderate scores and those that the staff of the RTBG
thought could be most readily replaced including the
collections of conifer cultivars (low), the Asian woodlands
(moderate) and the Protea and Erica collections (low)
(albeit staff recognised that these collections could be
redeveloped to achieve higher definitional values and
therefore higher scores);
the disjunction between the high score for the definitional
attributes of the WSUD garden and against its low
horticultural score which suggests the need to improve its
appearance if the community is to be encouraged to take up
WSUD techniques;
the disparity between the exceptional historic value of the
Gardens and the limited number of collections that
contribute to this value albeit the significant heritage trees
that have a high historic significance are widely spread
through more collections than the table would lead one to
believe – this ranking also possibly suggests that the
historic values of the Gardens are more in the built fabric,
the arrangement and design of the place or the combination
of effects that these contribute to the setting;
the limited commercial return from the economic garden
and veggie patch – this is surprising considering the
popularity of Pete’s Patch and the wide potential for
merchandising that it presents;
the moderate (New Zealand and Gondwana collections) or
low (Proteas and Ericas) rating of collections which are of a
southern hemisphere origin or affinity and have the potential
to more strongly contribute to a collection featuring such
plants; and
the limited use benefits derived from the foreshore and the
remnant bushland at the north of the Gardens.
Importantly, the findings suggest that without reinvigoration of the collections,
there is the potential that the Gardens will appear out of date to or out of touch
with the daily lives of visitors.
48 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Issue 8 Limited Interpretation
The analysis of the collections herein highlights the current limited use of
interpretation to tell the stories of the Gardens. The low scores for the
collections interpretation attributes suggests the under-realised potential of
interpretation to benefit the Gardens and its many visitors.
The low scores against interpretation when seen in conjunction with the only
moderate score against tourism values also suggests considerable
opportunities to improve the experience of the Gardens for tourists in
particular.
The lack of interpretation of the collections is compounded by the fragmented
way in which it is presented, mostly in the passive form.
These issues have long been recognised by the Gardens and are reflected in
the fact that the preparation of the RTBG Interpretation Plan 2008-2013 and
the RTBG Conservation Management Plan 2008-2013 were prerequisite plans
accompanying the preparation of the SMP.
5 . 3 I S S U E S I D E N T I F I E D W I T H T H E E S T A B L I S H M E N T A N D
C A R E O F T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S
The work on the Living Collections Plan identified a further suite of
management concerns that relate to the establishment and care of the living
collections.
Issue 9 Obtaining Plants and Plant Materials
The establishment of new collections is potentially affected by issues
surrounding quarantine requirements regarding the importation of plants25 to
the State, and the lack of an adequately isolated quarantine facility at the
RTBG for plants that do come in. Quarantine requirements particularly affect
the procurement of some cool climate species that have slow growth rates
(plants are required to exhibit a certain level of vegetative growth for
quarantine assessment before they are released).
The issues around quarantine require long-term planning in the development
of collections and have implications for the types of collections that can be
established.
Obtaining plants and plant materials from the wild is also difficult. Expeditions
to gather materials are expensive and costly of staff time. Beyond cost and
25 Note that quarantine does not apply to the importation of seed or in vitro materials.
Chapter 5 Management Issues 49
time interstate and/or international collecting trips are made more problematic
by the quarantine issues raised above.
Issue 10 Pests and Disease
The RTBG living collection is impacted on by the presence of both disease
pathogens and pest organisms. The issues arising point to the need for clear
procedures to limit prevent, mitigate and/or eliminate their presence in the
Gardens.
P A T H O G E N S
Issues associated with pathogens in the Gardens are considered to be
relatively well documented, with the soil borne diseases Phytophthora and
Armillaria comprising the most significant risks.
In recent years, major disease problems have been caused by the root rot
pathogens Armillaria luteobubalina and Phytophthora cinnamomi and by
Conifer (Cypress) Canker (Seiridium unicorne). Armillaria and Phytophthora
are both opportunistic diseases becoming significantly more prevalent and
active when other contributing factors allow for their establishment, including
excavation works and general soil disturbance.
Almost 200 plants and 2500m3 of soil containing infected material were
removed from 1996-1998 in an effort to control Armillaria. The disease has
largely been controlled except for one small area that has had recurrent
outbreaks and now contains an infected olive tree. This tree and its
surrounding root mass and soil has been programmed for removal and annual
monitoring for the disease continues each autumn. Elsewhere, Armillaria likely
remains present in a dormant state in some limited areas of the Gardens.
Phytophthora cinnamomi was introduced to or invaded the Gardens either
through cultivation or through the importation of garden materials and has
been present for some time. The distribution of Phytophthora has been
mapped in the Gardens and it still continues to kill plants by root rot in infected
areas. Apart from phosphonate application, there is no treatment, so this
disease is contained (i.e. not extended to uninfected areas) by following
designated hygiene procedures.
Although Phytophthora presently poses more of a problem for the Gardens
than Armillaria, a cure for either of the diseases is unlikely and the control
measures now in place are the best means of preventing further infection.
50 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Conifer (Cypress) Canker (Seiridium unicorne) is also present and has been
identified and documented as a significant disease in the garden. It is a
disfiguring disease affecting plants within the family Cupressaceae (e.g. the
family of conifers with shortened and compressed needles). Monitoring the
disease, removing infected material where appropriate and taking action to
reduce the spread of the disease has some effectiveness in limiting the impact
of this disease.
A range of other plant diseases of localised distribution are also encountered
from time to time as many of these lie dormant until conditions become
favourable for their establishment. Amongst these are Sclerotinia spp. and
Botrytis spp., both soil-dwelling fungi that have long-lived spore forms. These
disease outbreaks are precipitated by high humidity and plant density,
aggravated in some of the older beds by the fact that they have been in
continuous display use for over 30 years. The probability that the soil is
heavily and permanently contaminated is high. Recent changes should
improve the situation – the older beds have been de-commissioned and new
ones developed.
Sclerotinia (white rot) is a particular problem for summer annuals affecting
pithy-stemmed annuals including marigolds, dahlias, salvias, petunias,
lobelias, ageratum, zinnias and rudbeckia. Efforts to control the disease have
been to use more resistant species, crop rotation and a routine spray program
but the reality is the disease will continue to appear because the soil is, to all
intents, permanently infected.
More recently, impatiens have been affected by a fungal disease (Impatiens
Downy Mildew) originating in plugs supplied by an interstate company. Again,
being a fungal disease, the bed that the infected plants grew in will now be
contaminated by fungal spores and impatiens will no longer be able to be
planted in the ground, only in the Conservatory.
Other diseases have been known to enter the Gardens via insect vectors,
pruning tools, garden machinery and/or imported garden and construction
materials (particularly sandy loam soils).
The Nursery has sporadic outbreaks of fungal diseases such as powdery
mildew and fusarium wilt and these are treated as they arise. One disease
which poses a significant problem for the nursery-based Conservatory displays
is Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus. The virus infects over 900 species, many of
which are used as display plants by the RTBG. The vector for spread in
Tasmania is onion thrip. Control of the thrip and the disposal of infected
material are the two main mechanisms for stopping the spread of the virus.
Chapter 5 Management Issues 51
Control in the Gardens is, in part, contingent on control in the Government
House gardens where the thrip is also present.
P E S T S
The in-ground collection and the nursery suffer attack from the obvious range
of pests such as aphids, thrips, white fly and various beetles and their larvae.
These are controlled on a needs be basis as they arise.
Two pests that have had a more significant effect on the collections are green
spruce aphid and possums.
Green spruce aphid destroyed much of the lower foliage on the blue spruce
(Picea pungens) in the Gardens in 2003 but since that time early diagnosis
and appropriate treatment have resulted in control.
Throughout the Gardens, these and other pests, are being addressed through
Integrated Pest Management practices and constantly improving on-ground
horticulture.
Although subject to control measures, possums remain a periodic problem to a
whole range of tree species from natives to exotics. They tend to attack new
growth or trees under stress. Partial defoliation and disfiguration can result.
Issue 11 Weeds
Weeds pose problems to the living collection both in terms of routine
maintenance and the potential for the plants themselves to become weeds.
The reality is that many of the plants that have been and still are displayed in
botanic gardens throughout Australia can be considered environmental weeds.
The Council of Heads of Botanic Gardens (CHABG) initiated an Australian
Botanic Gardens Weeds Network in 2005. CHABG has formulated a policy,
adopted by the RTBG, and procedures to ensure a uniform Australia-wide
response to the weed problem by botanic gardens. Software for a Weed Risk
Assessment and Weed Management Procedure (WRAP’M) has been
developed as part of the process and this is now available to all members of
the network.
Issue 12 Site Suitability and Horticulture
The assessment of the collections found an overall high value attributed to the
core operations of the Gardens suggesting that staff are generally highly
skilled at the care of plants and their selection for the conditions of the site.
52 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Nonetheless, there are inherent issues arising from the nature of the site (i.e.
the effect of location and climate on the types of plants that can be grown) and
the condition of the site and its infrastructure.
Some the more important issues in regards to the latter include:
watering – many staff hours are consumed by the need for
manual application of water, particularly in summer, due to
the absence of irrigation system or the decrepit state of the
system where it does exist;
existing and potential impact of soil compaction resulting
from trampling during events (e.g. some areas previously
utilised for events and theatre productions have been
impacted in this way); and
poor drainage and waterlogging in some sections of the
gardens, resulting from leaking water features and
irrigation elements combined with complex topography.
There are also operational issues that arise from the nature of particular
collections. For instance, the Bedding Plants collection provides a great deal
of interest and appeal to the public as evidenced by the high scores against
the tourism and commercial attributes in the analysis of the collections.
However, the Bedding Plants require many hours by horticultural teams to
maintain them to a high standard. As well as the tasks of weeding and
cultivating these beds there is the issue of pest and disease management of
the selected species (see above). Depending on the species involved, the
time spent dealing with pest and disease outbreaks can be high.
Maintenance of mature plantings is also a major issue in the Gardens given
the age of some, their resultant scale and the degree of shade they cast. The
age of some trees means they need a regular regimen of pruning and other
care to maintain their structure, stability and health. In some locations, trees
have reached a size where their canopies are intertwined with other
specimens leading to crowding and loss of symmetry. The density of some
crowns creates deep shade and prevents rainfall from reaching the ground
limiting opportunities for growth in the understorey.
Chapter 5 Management Issues 53
Issue 13 Capacity to Manage
F U N D I N G A N D S T A F F
Funding and staff numbers are the two principle constraints on the capacity to
effectively manage and expand the Gardens.
Funding for effective management includes funding to:
maintain existing collections;
improve or rationalise existing plantings (which could
potentially enable mre to be done with less staff);
plan for and develop new collections or initiatives; and
participate as a partner in various agreements or programs
aimed at biodiversity conservation.
At the broadest level, the limited monies available to the Gardens severely
restricts the potential to engage new staff and/or to plan, manage and make
change within the Gardens.
More specifically, popular collections, such as the Japanese Garden and the
Sub-Antarctic collection are labour-intensive and expensive to maintain. Other
collections or areas (say for instance the Rills) are well past their useful life
and require significant maintenance to achieve a reasonable level of
presentation.
New collections have, nonetheless, been introduced with an inevitable
increase on staff workloads to maintain collections and displays to a high
standard. If staff numbers do not increase proportionally to the workload then
this will have an obvious impact on the overall maintenance of collections
wherein some collections and parts of collections will be given higher priority to
maintain at a high standard and the areas of lower priority will receive less
attention.
Even high value collections can be affected by a lack of funding. Notably the
funding for the Tasmanian Seed Conservation Centre is only guaranteed to
2010. The inability to sustain this facility would be a serious blow to the
credibility of the RTBG as a conservation organisation. Even if operational
funding for the TSCC were guaranteed there are also opportunities being
missed because of a lack of funds to purchase equipment that would enable
broader programs to be develop.
54 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Time spent on the physical maintenance of living plant collections often leaves
very little time to research and develop the contents of the collections. Many
horticulturists are passionate about what they do and have ideas about how
they would like to expand a collection through the sourcing of new plant
material. However, due to the demands of the work required on the existing
collections there is little time to do this within work hours and consequently
some of the collections are relatively limited.
Even more basic than the lack of time available to do research is the backlog
of day to day activities such as mapping, database entry, label and tag making
that arise due to demands on staff to do other tasks (volunteers have helped
with labeling in a minor way.
N U R S E R Y A N D O P E R A T I O N A L A R E A S
Further issue affecting the capacity to manage the living collections are the
constraints on the functionality of the Nursery and its operational areas.
At the spatial level, the Nursery needs to be reorganised to better meet the
dual use of the area for ornamental and conservation purposes.
At an operational level, vehicle access to the Gardens is through the Nursery
across roads and pavements near where potting mix preparation takes place.
This presents a serious threat to the hygiene of mixes and for the potential
spread of disease into the Gardens.
Water management in the Nursery is another problem. Contaminants from
fertilizer and pest and weed control run directly into ground water and, and as
a result, there is no ability for water recycling.
There is also a lack of space generally in terms of glasshouses, shade and
open areas in the Nursery and within all of these areas more benching is
needed to keep plants off the ground to reduce pest, disease and weed
problems.
The glasshouses pose another suite of problems including the need for active
ventilation to create air movement and reduce the outbreak of disease and the
requirement for mesh covers over openings to keep out insect pests.
Storage and handling of materials is also problematic in the tight space
available for the Nursery. For these reasons the northern storage area has
been increasingly used for bulk materials storage. This requires frequent
vehicle use to move materials through and around the Gardens. Alternatives
considered include the positioning of a small material (mulches) holding area
Chapter 5 Management Issues 55
at the eastern extremity of the Gardens and/or the possibility of holding some
essential garden materials in the Nursery holding bays. Either option would
reduce traveling and traffic through the Gardens and coupled with continued
attention as to how and when materials are moved would reduce impacts on
the visitor safety and experience.
The nursery may also need to be reorganised to allow visitor access in
response to the interpretive directions that have been established in the RTBG
Interpretation Plan 2008-2013.
Issue 14 Big Picture Commitments and Issues (Climate Change)
The RTBG has significant nature conservation responsibilities in relation to the
Tasmanian Nature Conservation Strategy and the National Strategy for the
Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity 1996. At an international level,
the RTBG is a member of the Botanic Gardens Conservation International (the
BGCI26), and supports the aims of the Botanic Gardens Conservation Strategy
1989 (as endorsed by IUCN, WWF, FAO, UNEP, and UNESCO), the
International Agenda for Botanic Gardens in Conservation 2000, and the
Global Strategy for Plant Conservation and Climate Change. The RTBG is
also a member of the Australian Network for Plant Conservation.
An outcome of the 2nd World Botanic Gardens Congress in Barcelona, Spain
2004 was the development of a series of 20 targets (the 2010 Targets). The
2010 Targets are intended to aid in the achievement of the objectives within
International Agenda for Botanic Gardens in Conservation, and to act as a
contribution to the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. As a signatory to
the BGCI, the RTBG is making considerable progress in its contribution to the
achievement of Target 8 of the 2010 Targets regarding conservation of
threatened plants27, through the work of the Tasmanian Seed Conservation
Centre and other collections involving the propagation of threatened and rare
Tasmanian native species.
Nonetheless there is significant room for improvement in the collections to
assist in meeting the objectives of the various agreements that have been
made and specifically to the meeting of the BGCI targets.
26 The BGCI is a global cooperative botanic gardens organisation. 27 Target 8 – 60% of threatened plant species in accessible ex situ collections, preferably in the country of origin, and 10% of these species included in recovery and restoration programs (see http://www.bgci.org/index.php?id=74).
56 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
C L I M A T E C H A N G E
Climate presents a range of potential issues for the management of the
collections at the RTBG. On the ground within the Gardens are the potential
effects of:
reduced or increased rainfall and temperatures;
rising sea level;
greater frequency of extreme weather events.
Each of these impacts will affect which plants can be grown in the Gardens,
their requirements for on-going maintenance and their longevity. For instance
reduced rainfall could lead to the need for increased irrigation and wind
protection to reduce the effects of drying. Ultimately changes in climate may
limit the opportunities to grow some plants at the RTBG, forcing the creation of
off-site annexes in more conducive locations if affected plants are to remain in
the overall collection and in particular, if threatened Tasmanian flora is to be
protected (see below).
Climate change is also likely lead to an increase in the numbers of species
that are rare and threatened. Therefore, at a global level, botanic gardens,
including the RTBG, will have an increasingly important place in the ex situ
conservation of species through the growing of plants and/or in the conduct of
related research. This role has been recognised by the BGCI and in the
National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy adopted by CHABG that have
established a suite of goals and committed to actions to prevent species loss.
These in turn will require the RTBG to play an expanding role, through its living
collections and the TSCC, if it is to meaningfully contribute to nature
conservation and commitment as a member of the BGCI and CHABG28.
28 Note that such an expanding role is limited by available funding and further threatened by the lack of guaranteed funding for the TSCC beyond 2010.
6 . P O L I C I E S F O R L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S
The discussion of issues in Section 5 pointed to the need for defined policies
and procedures in relation to the living collections.
Policies provide principles, standards and guidelines and direct the creation of
procedures that apply to the living collections. Policies have no statutory
weight, but supply criteria and guidance in setting a course of action.
Procedures on the other hand are tools for the implementation of policies.
Procedures are developed by the staff of the RTBG and detail the content or
step by step processes that are undertaken in relation to the tasks of
managing and maintaining the Gardens.
The focus of this section, then, is on policies that will guide managers in their
decision making about the living collections over the coming 20 years. In
particular, the policies have been developed for:
the living collections; and
biodiversity and conservation.
By necessity these policies are broad in scope and it is recognised that more
specific sub-policies might need to be developed in relation to certain issues
as part of procedural development. For instance, through its commitment to
CHABG, the RTBG has adopted its policy on weed management that would be
an ideal ‘front end’ to weed management procedures for the Gardens.
Nonetheless, the proposed policies give clear direction for decision making in
critical areas surrounding;
the establishment, renewal and de-accession of collections
and operational and procedural guidance on how this can
be achieved; and
issues of biodiversity and conservation and how these
activities are prioritised.
58 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Purposefully left blank.
Po
licie
s
Gu
idel
ines
1.1
Liv
ing
Co
llect
ion
s P
olic
y
Man
agem
ent
of
Co
llect
ion
s
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns w
ill b
e de
velo
ped
and
man
aged
in a
ccor
danc
e th
e R
TB
G v
isio
n,
mis
sion
, goa
ls, p
olic
ies
and
inte
rpre
tatio
n th
emes
and
the
polic
ies
and
obje
ctiv
es o
f th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
Pla
n.
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
A L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
will
be
esta
blis
hed
cons
istin
g of
:
• H
ortic
ultu
ral B
otan
ist
• N
urse
ry M
anag
er
• H
ortic
ultu
ral T
eam
Lea
ders
(2)
• T
eam
Lea
der
(Arb
oris
t)
• M
anag
er, H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s
• H
ortic
ultu
ral C
o-or
dina
tor
• (I
nter
pret
atio
n of
ficer
/ E
duca
tion
offic
er w
hen
requ
ired)
The
pur
pose
of t
he L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
is to
impl
emen
t the
Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
Pla
n in
clud
ing:
• co
ntin
uous
rev
iew
of t
he c
olle
ctio
ns to
ens
ure
thei
r co
nten
t ref
lect
s th
e st
rate
gic
fram
ewor
k of
the
RT
BG
;
• pa
rtic
ipat
e in
the
prep
arat
ion
of 5
yea
r st
rate
gic
plan
s an
d an
nual
bus
ines
s op
erat
ions
pla
ns
• fo
rmal
ly a
sses
s th
e st
atus
of t
he c
olle
ctio
n in
clud
ing
cons
ider
atio
n of
acq
uisi
tions
and
de-
acce
ssio
ns fo
rwar
ded
to it
by
the
Man
ager
of H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s fo
r re
view
by
the
Dire
ctor
;
• es
tabl
ish
appr
opria
te p
roce
dure
s (m
aint
enan
ce p
lans
) fo
r th
e m
anag
emen
t of t
he c
olle
ctio
ns;
• an
nual
rev
iew
of t
he c
olle
ctio
ns to
that
the
desi
red
man
agem
ent s
tand
ards
are
bei
ng a
chie
ved
and
that
the
appr
opria
te
proc
edur
es a
re b
eing
app
lied
to e
ach
colle
ctio
n; a
nd
• re
view
the
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan
as s
et o
ut b
elow
.
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Fin
al a
utho
rity
for
all d
ecis
ions
reg
ardi
ng c
orre
ctiv
e, r
enew
al a
nd/o
r de
velo
pmen
t ini
tiativ
es a
nd a
ctio
ns in
rel
atio
n to
the
colle
ctio
ns a
nd
spec
imen
s re
sts
with
the
Dire
ctor
or
othe
r de
lega
ted
auth
ority
.
Rec
ords
A c
ompr
ehen
sive
pla
nt d
ata
base
will
be
mai
ntai
ned
that
rec
ords
all
exis
ting
plan
ts, p
lant
acq
uisi
tions
and
de-
acce
ssio
ns a
s se
t out
in th
e P
lant
Rec
ords
Pro
cedu
res.
Op
erat
ion
al P
roce
du
res
The
RT
BG
will
est
ablis
h a
com
preh
ensi
ve s
uite
of O
pera
tiona
l P
roce
dure
s (M
aint
enan
ce P
lans
) fo
r th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
to g
uide
the
day-
to-d
ay
man
agem
ent o
f the
Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
in
its p
ursu
it of
the
high
est s
tand
ards
of
hort
icul
tura
l pra
ctic
e.
Sco
pe
The
Ope
ratio
nal P
roce
dure
s fo
r th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
will
set
out
the
scop
e of
act
iviti
es r
equi
red
to d
evel
op a
nd m
anag
e th
e co
llect
ions
an
d to
ach
ieve
a h
igh
leve
l of h
ortic
ultu
ral m
aint
enan
ce w
ithin
the
colle
ctio
ns.
Exp
ecta
tions
for
task
s w
ill b
e cl
early
sta
ted
in a
use
r-fr
iend
ly
form
at.
Exi
stin
g P
roce
dure
s
Exi
stin
g pr
oced
ures
and
pro
toco
ls o
f rel
evan
ce to
the
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns w
ill b
e re
view
ed to
ens
ure
thei
r co
mpa
tibili
ty w
ith th
e vi
sion
, m
issi
on a
nd o
bjec
tives
of t
he G
arde
ns a
nd th
e va
rious
pol
icie
s he
rein
.
Whe
re n
eces
sary
exi
stin
g pr
oced
ures
will
be
ratio
nalis
ed to
rei
nfor
ce r
elat
ions
hips
bet
wee
n ac
tiviti
es w
here
they
occ
ur a
nd/o
r to
red
uce
dupl
icat
ion
betw
een
vario
us p
roce
dure
s.
New
Pro
cedu
res
New
pro
cedu
res
will
be
deve
lope
d as
req
uire
d to
ach
ieve
the
visi
on, m
issi
on a
nd o
bjec
tives
of t
he G
arde
ns o
r in
res
pons
e to
the
vario
us
polic
ies
here
in.
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Hor
ticul
tura
l or
bota
nica
l sta
ff w
ith a
ppro
pria
te e
xper
tise
will
pre
pare
pro
cedu
res
for
final
rev
iew
and
app
rova
l of t
he L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns
Wor
king
Gro
up.
Co
llect
ion
s E
stab
lish
men
t o
r R
enew
al
All
new
col
lect
ions
will
sup
port
the
Roy
al
Tas
man
ian
Bot
anic
al G
arde
ns L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan,
the
RT
BG
vis
ion,
m
issi
on, g
oals
, pol
icie
s an
d in
terp
reta
tion
them
es.
Pro
posa
ls a
nd A
sses
smen
t – In
divi
dual
Spe
cies
Pro
posa
ls fo
r ac
quis
ition
of i
ndiv
idua
l pla
nts/
spec
ies
will
be
will
be
forw
arde
d by
hor
ticul
tura
l or
bota
nica
l sta
ff to
the
Man
ager
of
Hor
ticul
tura
l Ass
ets
for
appr
oval
usi
ng th
e pr
oced
ures
set
out
in th
e P
roce
dure
s fo
r E
valu
atio
n an
d A
cqui
sitio
n/D
e-A
cces
sion
.
Pro
posa
ls a
nd A
sses
smen
t – C
olle
ctio
ns E
stab
lishm
ent o
r R
enew
al
Pro
posa
ls fo
r ne
w c
olle
ctio
ns o
r fo
r th
e su
bsta
ntiv
e re
new
al o
f exi
stin
g co
llect
ions
will
be
forw
arde
d by
hor
ticul
tura
l or
bota
nica
l sta
ff to
the
Man
ager
of H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s. P
ropo
sals
will
incl
ude
a pr
elim
inar
y ev
alua
tion
as s
et o
ut in
the
Pro
cedu
res
for
Eva
luat
ion
for
Acq
uisi
tion/
De-
Acc
essi
on.
The
Man
ager
of H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s w
ill p
repa
re a
n Is
sues
Brie
f (as
set
out
in th
e Is
sues
Brie
f Pro
cedu
res)
for
the
appr
oval
of t
he L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
.
The
Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
Wor
king
Gro
up w
ill e
valu
ate
the
Issu
es B
rief a
gain
st th
e fo
llow
ing
crite
ria fo
r S
peci
es S
elec
tion,
Sou
rce
and
Pro
vena
nce
and
othe
r m
atte
rs a
s it
deem
s im
port
ant.
The
app
rova
l of t
he D
irect
or o
r a
dele
gate
d au
thor
ity is
req
uire
d on
com
plet
ion
of th
e ev
alua
tion
by th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
Wor
king
Gro
up.
Spe
cies
Sel
ectio
n
With
in a
ll co
llect
ions
prio
rity
will
be
give
n to
:
• t
he d
evel
opm
ent a
nd e
nric
hmen
t of a
ll as
pect
s of
the
Tas
man
ian
Flo
ra in
exi
stin
g co
llect
ions
and
in th
e de
velo
pmen
t of n
ew c
olle
ctio
ns;
and
• th
e de
velo
pmen
t and
enr
ichm
ent o
f exi
stin
g co
llect
ions
and
in th
e de
velo
pmen
t of n
ew c
olle
ctio
ns o
f coo
l clim
ate
Sou
ther
n H
emis
pher
e pl
ants
.
The
exc
eptio
ns to
the
abov
e pr
iorit
ies
are
the
acqu
isiti
on o
f spe
cies
whi
ch a
re r
equi
red
to s
uppo
rt th
e m
aint
enan
ce o
f
• id
entif
ied
herit
age
colle
ctio
ns a
nd th
eir
valu
es; a
nd
• or
nam
enta
l col
lect
ions
(al
beit
whe
re p
ossi
ble
thes
e w
ill fa
vour
Tas
man
ian
or o
ther
coo
l clim
ate
Sou
ther
n H
emis
pher
e sp
ecie
s w
here
pos
sibl
e).
In s
elec
ting
Tas
man
ian
spec
ies
pref
eren
ce w
ill b
e gi
ven
to e
ndem
ic s
peci
es o
r su
b-sp
ecie
s ov
er th
ose
with
wid
er A
ustr
alia
n di
strib
utio
n.
In s
elec
ting
from
the
spec
ies
avai
labl
e in
the
abov
e ra
nges
:
• p
refe
renc
e w
ill b
e gi
ven
to s
peci
es th
at a
re th
reat
ened
per
the
Bio
dive
rsity
and
Con
serv
atio
n P
olic
y;
• p
refe
renc
e w
ill b
e gi
ven
to s
peci
es o
ver
hybr
ids
or c
ultiv
ars
(see
bel
ow).
In
sel
ectin
g fr
om th
e sp
ecie
s av
aila
ble
in th
e ab
ove
rang
es c
onsi
dera
tion
will
be
give
n to
the:
• sp
ecie
s’ M
anag
eria
l and
Use
Attr
ibut
es; a
nd
• us
e of
hor
ticul
tura
l sel
ectio
ns o
f Tas
man
ian
spec
ies.
Spe
cies
that
:
• co
ntra
vene
the
CIT
ES
(C
ontr
ol o
f Tra
de in
End
ange
red
Spe
cies
) po
licy
on p
lant
col
lect
ing
and
trad
ing
• ar
e pr
ohib
ited
impo
rts
• ar
e de
clar
ed n
oxio
us w
eeds
• ar
e lik
ely
or k
now
n en
viro
nmen
tal o
r ag
ricul
tura
l wee
ds
• ar
e kn
own
to h
ave
or h
ave
the
pote
ntia
l to
faci
litat
e th
e tr
ansm
issi
on o
f dis
ease
to c
omm
erci
al c
rops
or
othe
r sp
ecie
s of
val
ue h
eld
by th
e G
arde
ns
• ar
e kn
own
to b
e or
like
ly to
be
sour
ces
of in
trog
ress
ion
prob
lem
s (g
enet
ic c
onta
min
atio
n); a
nd/o
r
• ar
e kn
own
to c
ause
or
are
likel
y to
cau
se p
ublic
hea
lth p
robl
ems
will
not
be
acqu
ired
unle
ss r
eque
sted
and
aut
horis
ed b
y a
rele
vant
aut
horit
y fo
r sp
ecifi
c ap
prov
ed p
urpo
ses.
Sou
rce
All
plan
t mat
eria
ls w
ill b
e le
gally
sou
rced
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith a
ll re
leva
nt la
ws
regu
latin
g co
llect
ion,
impo
rtat
ion,
pro
paga
tion,
pat
ent a
nd
owne
rshi
p
Pla
nt m
ater
ial t
hat m
eets
the
need
s of
the
RT
BG
will
be
acce
pted
from
(in
ord
er o
f pre
fere
nce)
:
• di
rect
col
lect
ion
from
the
wild
by
RT
BG
sta
ff
• ot
her
bota
nic
gard
ens
or r
ecog
nise
d co
llect
ors
• pu
rcha
se fr
om a
rep
utab
le n
urse
ry o
r co
llect
or
• do
natio
ns fr
om r
eput
able
sou
rces
• co
llect
ions
from
old
gar
dens
, nur
serie
s et
c
Rep
lace
men
t of p
lant
s de
emed
to h
ave
‘her
itage
’ val
ue w
ill c
onsi
der
use
of s
tock
pro
paga
ted
from
the
orig
inal
sou
rce
or fr
om
auth
entic
ated
sou
rces
.
P
rove
nanc
e
Onl
y th
ose
plan
ts o
f kno
wn
prov
enan
ce (
i.e. s
tock
with
full
prov
enan
ce d
etai
ls, v
erifi
catio
n of
aut
hent
icity
and
her
bariu
m v
ouch
ers)
will
be
used
.
In s
elec
ting
from
pla
nts
of k
now
n pr
oven
ance
, pre
fere
nce
will
be
give
n to
(in
ord
er o
f pre
fere
nce)
:
• pl
ants
sou
rced
from
the
wild
;
• pl
ants
of k
now
n pr
oven
ance
obt
aine
d fr
om a
noth
er b
otan
ic g
arde
n or
acc
redi
ted
colle
ctor
, eith
er a
s se
ed o
r of
fspr
ing
of p
lant
s co
llect
ed in
the
wild
, or
grow
n fr
om s
elec
tions
with
out d
emon
stra
ted
dang
er o
f hyb
ridis
atio
n
• cu
ltiva
rs o
r hy
brid
s of
wild
orig
in; a
nd
• cu
ltiva
rs o
r hy
brid
s th
at c
an b
e lin
ked
dire
ctly
to th
eir
orig
inat
or o
r so
urce
, and
whi
ch r
efle
ct th
e de
velo
pmen
t of p
lant
bre
edin
g or
se
lect
ion.
Sup
port
ing
Doc
umen
tatio
n
Con
side
ratio
n w
ill n
eed
to b
e gi
ven
to th
e de
sign
layo
ut o
f all
new
col
lect
ions
incl
udin
g ca
re in
the:
• or
gani
satio
n of
spa
ces
and
plan
tings
, allo
win
g fo
r in
nova
tive
or c
reat
ive
hort
icul
tura
l dis
play
s w
here
app
ropr
iate
;
• cr
eatio
n of
pat
h ne
twor
ks to
allo
w fo
r m
aint
enan
ce a
nd u
nive
rsal
acc
ess
(as
far
as p
ossi
ble)
; and
• se
lect
ion
of p
lant
s an
d th
eir
rela
tions
hips
to o
ne a
noth
er to
acc
ount
for
thei
r lin
e, fo
rm, c
olou
r an
d te
xtur
e.
All
new
col
lect
ions
will
req
uire
a h
ortic
ultu
ral m
anag
emen
t pla
n.
Rec
ords
All
de-a
cces
sion
s w
ill b
e re
cord
ed u
sing
the
met
hods
des
crib
ed in
the
RT
BG
’s P
lant
Rec
ords
Pro
cedu
res.
De-
Acc
essi
on
s an
d D
isp
osa
l of
Pla
nt
Mat
eria
l - G
ener
al
Pla
nt c
olle
ctio
ns, o
r su
bsta
ntiv
e pa
rts
ther
eof,
may
from
tim
e to
tim
e be
re
mov
ed fr
om th
e G
arde
ns (
de-
acce
ssio
n) in
res
pons
e to
the
Roy
al
Tas
man
ian
Bot
anic
al G
arde
ns L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan
or th
e R
TB
G v
isio
n,
mis
sion
, goa
ls, p
olic
ies
and
inte
rpre
tatio
n th
emes
.
Ass
essm
ent a
nd A
utho
rity
Pro
posa
ls fo
r de
-acc
essi
on o
f a c
olle
ctio
n, o
r su
bsta
ntiv
e pa
rt th
ereo
f, w
ill b
e fo
rwar
ded
by h
ortic
ultu
ral o
r bo
tani
cal s
taff
to th
e M
anag
er o
f H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s. P
ropo
sals
will
incl
ude
a pr
elim
inar
y ev
alua
tion
as s
et o
ut in
the
Pro
cedu
res
for
Eva
luat
ion
for
Acq
uisi
tion/
De-
Acc
essi
on.
The
Man
ager
of H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s w
ill p
repa
re a
n Is
sues
Brie
f (as
set
out
in th
e Is
sues
Brie
f Pro
cedu
res)
for
the
appr
oval
of t
he L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
.
Prio
r to
de-
acce
ssio
n th
e co
llect
ion
will
be
eval
uate
d by
the
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
aga
inst
the
follo
win
g cr
iteria
for
Spe
cies
S
elec
tion,
Sou
rce
and
Pro
vena
nce
as a
bove
.
Rat
iona
le fo
r D
e-A
cces
sion
P
riorit
y fo
r de
-acc
essi
on w
ill b
e gi
ven
to c
olle
ctio
ns, o
r su
bsta
ntiv
e po
rtio
ns th
ereo
f, th
at d
o no
t mee
t the
req
uire
men
ts fo
r C
olle
ctio
n E
stab
lishm
ent o
r R
enew
al a
s ab
ove.
Pre
fere
nce
will
be
give
n to
the
de-a
cces
sion
of p
lant
s or
col
lect
ions
that
:
• cr
eate
pub
lic s
afet
y co
ncer
ns
• ex
hibi
t dis
ease
or
decl
ine
• w
hose
Man
ager
ial A
ttrib
utes
are
low
(i.e
. not
sui
ted
to th
e si
te, r
equi
re e
xces
sive
mai
nten
ance
not
just
ified
by
the
bene
fits
of
rete
ntio
n in
the
colle
ctio
n an
d/or
det
ract
from
the
visu
al v
alue
s of
the
site
)
• ar
e re
dund
ant (
i.e. o
ccur
in o
ther
loca
tions
with
in th
e G
arde
ns o
r ar
e si
gnifi
cant
ly r
epre
sent
ed in
oth
er r
egio
nal c
olle
ctio
ns, w
here
th
ere
is s
uret
y of
res
erva
tion)
.
Con
side
ratio
n w
ill b
e gi
ven
to th
e re
mov
al o
f spe
cies
that
are
com
mon
in g
ener
al c
ultiv
atio
n in
the
com
mun
ity.
Con
side
ratio
n w
ill b
e gi
ven
to th
e de
-acc
essi
on o
f pla
nts
or c
olle
ctio
ns in
loca
tions
req
uire
d by
the
RT
BG
for
othe
r pu
rpos
es.
Ass
essm
ent f
or D
e-A
cces
sion
Prio
r to
de-
acce
ssio
n, th
e af
fect
ed p
lant
, pla
nts
or c
olle
ctio
ns w
ill b
e ev
alua
ted
by th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
Wor
king
Gro
up fo
r:
• th
eir
impo
rtan
ce to
val
ues
of th
e G
arde
ns (
i.e. D
efin
ition
al, U
se a
nd/o
r M
anag
eria
l Attr
ibut
es);
• th
e po
tent
ial f
or im
pact
s to
aris
e w
ithin
the
Gar
dens
from
thei
r re
mov
al (
i.e. e
nviro
nmen
tal o
r so
cial
impa
cts)
; and
• th
e po
tent
ial f
or im
pact
s to
aris
e th
roug
h th
eir
disp
osal
(by
wha
teve
r m
eans
)
Dis
posa
l
Dis
posa
l will
be
unde
rtak
en in
acc
orda
nce
with
reg
iona
l, na
tiona
l and
inte
rnat
iona
l leg
al r
equi
rem
ents
.
Dis
posa
l may
incl
ude:
exc
hang
e, d
istr
ibut
ion
to o
ther
inst
itutio
ns, p
lant
sal
es o
r de
stru
ctio
n
Dis
posa
l of p
lant
mat
eria
l will
follo
w th
e R
TB
G’s
Dis
posa
l Pro
cedu
res
Rec
ords
All
de-a
cces
sion
s w
ill b
e re
cord
ed u
sing
the
met
hods
des
crib
ed in
the
RT
BG
’s P
lant
Rec
ords
Pro
cedu
res.
De-
Acc
essi
on
s an
d D
isp
osa
l of
Pla
nt
Mat
eria
l – M
atu
re T
rees
Mat
ure
tree
s m
ay fr
om ti
me
to ti
me
be
rem
oved
from
the
Gar
dens
(de
-
Ass
essm
ent a
nd A
utho
rity
Pro
posa
ls fo
r de
-acc
essi
on o
f mat
ure
tree
s w
ill b
e fo
rwar
ded
by h
ortic
ultu
ral o
r bo
tani
cal s
taff
to th
e M
anag
er o
f Hor
ticul
tura
l Ass
ets
and
the
Tea
m L
eade
r A
rbor
icul
ture
. Pro
posa
ls w
ill in
clud
e a
prel
imin
ary
eval
uatio
n as
set
out
in th
e P
roce
dure
s fo
r E
valu
atio
n fo
r A
cqui
sitio
n/D
e-A
cces
sion
.
acce
ssio
n) in
res
pons
e to
the
Roy
al
Tas
man
ian
Bot
anic
al G
arde
ns L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan,
the
RT
BG
vis
ion,
m
issi
on, g
oals
, pol
icie
s an
d in
terp
reta
tion
them
es.
The
Man
ager
of H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s w
ill p
repa
re a
n Is
sues
Brie
f in
cons
ulta
tion
with
the
Tea
m L
eade
r A
rbor
icul
ture
(as
set
out
in th
e Is
sues
B
rief P
roce
dure
s) fo
r th
e ap
prov
al o
f the
Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
Wor
king
Gro
up.
Prio
r to
de-
acce
ssio
n al
l pla
nts
will
be
eval
uate
d by
the
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
aga
inst
the
follo
win
g cr
iteria
for
Spe
cies
S
elec
tion,
Sou
rce
and
Pro
vena
nce
as p
er th
e gu
idel
ines
for
acqu
isiti
on.
Dec
isio
ns b
y th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
Wor
king
Gro
up r
egar
ding
mat
ure
tree
s in
the
Sig
nific
ant T
ree
Col
lect
ion
and/
or
thos
e w
ith e
xcep
tiona
l H
erita
ge V
alue
(as
eva
luat
ed a
gain
st th
e cr
iteria
for
asse
ssm
ent o
f Her
itage
Val
ues
set o
ut in
the
RT
BG
Con
serv
atio
n M
anag
emen
t Pla
n)
will
acc
esse
d in
con
sulta
tion
with
the
Tas
man
ian
Her
itage
Cou
ncil.
De-
acce
ssio
n of
tree
s w
ith H
erita
ge V
alue
sha
ll be
con
sist
ent w
ith th
e st
atut
ory
requ
irem
ents
of t
he H
isto
ric C
ultu
ral H
erita
ge A
ct 1
995.
The
fina
l aut
horit
y fo
r th
e de
-acc
essi
on o
f tre
es is
with
the
Dire
ctor
of t
he R
TB
G.
Rat
iona
le fo
r R
emov
al
Prio
rity
for
de-a
cces
sion
of m
atur
e tr
ees
will
be
give
n to
spe
cim
ens
that
do
not m
eet t
he r
equi
rem
ents
for
Pla
nt A
cqui
sitio
n as
abo
ve.
Prio
rity
will
be
give
n to
the
de-a
cces
sion
of m
atur
e tr
ees
that
inco
nsis
tent
with
the
Str
ateg
ic M
aste
r P
lan.
Con
side
ratio
n w
ill b
e gi
ven
to th
e de
-acc
essi
on o
f pla
nts
or c
olle
ctio
ns in
loca
tions
req
uire
d by
the
RT
BG
for
othe
r pu
rpos
es.
Tre
es m
ay a
lso
be r
emov
ed th
at:
• d
o no
mee
t pub
lic s
afet
y re
quire
men
ts;
• a
re d
isea
sed
or in
fect
ed b
y pe
sts
to th
e po
int w
here
they
can
not b
e re
habi
litat
ed to
goo
d he
alth
;
• h
ave
reac
hed
mat
urity
and
sta
rted
to s
enes
ce;
• h
ave
low
Man
ager
ial A
ttrib
utes
(i.e
. not
sui
ted
to th
e si
te, r
equi
re e
xces
sive
mai
nten
ance
not
just
ified
by
the
bene
fits
of r
eten
tion
in th
e co
llect
ion
and/
or d
etra
ct fr
om th
e vi
sual
val
ues
of th
e si
te)
and/
or
• a
re r
edun
dant
(i.e
. occ
ur in
oth
er lo
catio
ns w
ithin
the
Gar
dens
or
are
sign
ifica
ntly
rep
rese
nted
in o
ther
reg
iona
l col
lect
ions
, whe
re th
ere
is
sure
ty o
f res
erva
tion)
.
Ass
essm
ent f
or D
e-A
cces
sion
Prio
r to
de-
acce
ssio
n, th
e af
fect
ed tr
ee w
ill b
e ev
alua
ted
by th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
Wor
king
Gro
up fo
r:
• th
e po
ssib
ility
of c
onse
rvin
g th
e tr
ee in
clud
ing
revi
ew o
f the
mec
hani
sms
requ
ired
for
rete
ntio
n an
d th
e im
plic
atio
ns o
f suc
h on
op
erat
ions
and
ava
ilabl
e fu
ndin
g;
• it
s im
port
ance
to v
alue
s of
the
Gar
dens
(i.e
. Def
initi
onal
, Use
and
/or
Man
ager
ial V
alue
s);
• th
e po
tent
ial f
or im
pact
s to
aris
e w
ithin
the
Gar
dens
from
thei
r re
mov
al (
i.e. e
nviro
nmen
tal o
r so
cial
impa
cts)
; and
• th
e po
tent
ial f
or im
pact
s to
aris
e th
roug
h th
eir
disp
osal
(by
wha
teve
r m
eans
).
Rep
lace
men
t
Whe
re a
tree
is d
eem
ed to
be
of e
xcep
tiona
l Her
itage
Val
ue o
r E
xcep
tiona
l Hor
ticul
tura
l Val
ue, c
onsi
dera
tion
will
be
give
n to
its
repl
acem
ent w
ith a
pla
nt o
f sim
ilar
spec
ies
prov
ided
that
rel
evan
t Dis
ease
Con
trol
Pol
icie
s an
d P
roce
dure
s w
ill n
ot b
e co
ntra
vene
d.
Whe
re th
e se
lect
ion
of s
peci
es in
not
con
stric
ted
by o
ne o
f the
abo
ve v
alue
s, th
e gu
idel
ines
for
spec
ies
acqu
isiti
on (
abov
e) w
ill a
pply
.
Com
mun
icat
ions
Pla
n
Whe
re a
tree
is to
be
rem
oved
that
has
hig
h-to
exc
eptio
nal H
erita
ge V
alue
or
high
to e
xcep
tiona
l oth
er v
alue
s, a
com
mun
icat
ions
str
ateg
y w
ill b
e de
velo
ped
in c
onsi
dera
tion
of p
oten
tial p
ublic
rel
atio
ns c
once
rns.
Rec
ords
All
de-a
cces
sion
s w
ill b
e re
cord
ed u
sing
the
met
hods
des
crib
ed in
the
RT
BG
’s P
lant
Rec
ords
Pro
cedu
res.
Rev
iew
of
the
Liv
ing
Co
llect
ion
s P
lan
The
Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
Pla
n w
ill b
e ev
alua
ted
and
revi
ewed
on
a re
gula
r an
d on
-goi
ng b
asis
to e
nsur
e th
at it
sup
port
s th
e vi
sion
, mis
sion
and
obj
ectiv
es o
f the
G
arde
ns a
nd th
e di
rect
ions
est
ablis
hed
in
the
Str
ateg
ic M
aste
r P
lan.
Ann
ual R
evie
w
An
annu
al r
evie
w w
ill b
e un
dert
aken
by
the
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan
to e
nsur
e th
e re
com
men
datio
ns o
f the
Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
Pla
n ar
e ap
prop
riate
ly in
corp
orat
ed in
to th
e A
nnua
l Bus
ines
s O
pera
tiona
l Pla
n.
5-Y
ear
Rev
iew
A 5
-yea
r re
view
on
the
stat
us o
f the
livi
ng c
olle
ctio
ns w
ill b
e un
dert
aken
eve
ry 5
yea
rs to
ens
ure
that
the
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan
is
appr
opria
tely
alig
ned
with
the
5 ye
ar S
trat
egic
Ope
ratio
nal P
lan.
20-Y
ear
Rev
iew
A c
ompr
ehen
sive
rev
iew
of t
he L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan
will
be
unde
rtak
en e
very
20
year
s. T
he p
urpo
se o
f the
20
year
rev
iew
will
be
to
alig
n w
ith L
ivin
g C
olle
ctio
ns P
lan
with
the
Str
ateg
ic M
aste
r P
lan
and
will
incl
ude
a co
mpr
ehen
sive
rev
iew
of t
he c
olle
ctio
n ba
sed
on it
s va
lues
;
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Rev
iew
s w
ill b
e un
dert
aken
by
the
Livi
ng C
olle
ctio
ns W
orki
ng G
roup
.
Sup
port
for
the
Maj
or R
evie
w p
roce
ss m
ay b
e so
ught
from
out
side
con
sulta
nts
with
exp
erie
nce
rele
vant
to th
e ta
sk.
1.2.
Bio
div
ersi
ty a
nd
Co
nse
rvat
ion
P
olic
y
Co
nse
rvat
ion
Co
llect
ion
s
The
RT
BG
will
add
ress
its
role
as
a co
nser
vatio
n or
gani
satio
n th
roug
h th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent a
nd m
aint
enan
ce o
f ex
situ
co
llect
ions
of s
peci
es o
f con
serv
atio
n si
gnifi
canc
e.
Def
initi
on o
f Spe
cies
of C
onse
rvat
ion
Sig
nific
ance
Spe
cies
of c
onse
rvat
ion
sign
ifica
nce
are
thos
e sp
ecie
s lis
ted
as:
• en
dang
ered
, vul
nera
ble
or r
are
unde
r th
e T
asm
ania
n T
hrea
tene
d S
peci
es P
rote
ctio
n A
ct 1
995;
and
/or
• vu
lner
able
, end
ange
red,
crit
ical
ly e
ndan
gere
d, e
xtin
ct in
the
wild
or
extin
ct b
y th
e E
nviro
nmen
t Pro
tect
ion
and
Bio
dive
rsity
C
onse
rvat
ion
Act
199
9 or
by
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Uni
on fo
r th
e C
onse
rvat
ion
of N
atur
e R
ed L
ist (
IUC
N).
Prio
rity
for
Con
serv
atio
n C
olle
ctio
ns:
Prio
rity
for
the
colle
ctio
n of
spe
cies
of c
onse
rvat
ion
sign
ifica
nce
will
be
give
n to
thos
e sp
ecie
s th
at:
• ar
e lis
ted
as m
ost a
t ris
k;
• fo
r T
asm
ania
n sp
ecie
s ov
er th
ose
from
oth
er c
ool c
limat
e S
outh
ern
Hem
isph
ere
loca
tions
; and
• oc
cur
regi
onal
ly (
part
icul
arly
thos
e th
reat
ened
spe
cies
from
the
Que
ens
Dom
ain)
.
Con
side
ratio
n w
ill b
e gi
ven
to s
peci
es o
f con
serv
atio
n si
gnifi
canc
e fr
om N
orth
ern
Hem
isph
ere
or o
ther
Sou
ther
n H
emis
pher
e cl
imat
es.
Nur
sery
Col
lect
ions
Per
man
ent n
urse
ry c
olle
ctio
ns o
f thr
eate
ned
plan
ts m
ay b
e m
aint
aine
d w
here
they
mee
t the
prio
ritie
s fo
r sp
ecie
s of
con
serv
atio
n si
gnifi
canc
e as
set
out
abo
ve.
Nur
sery
col
lect
ions
may
incl
ude
mat
eria
ls r
equi
red
for
germ
inat
ion,
trad
ition
al v
eget
ativ
e an
d tis
sue
cultu
re p
ropa
gatio
n an
d de
velo
pmen
t.
Exp
erim
enta
l Col
lect
ions
The
RT
BG
may
mai
ntai
n ex
perim
enta
l col
lect
ions
com
patib
le w
ith it
s po
licy
on C
onse
rvat
ion
Res
earc
h (b
elow
).
Tem
pora
ry C
olle
ctio
ns
The
RT
BG
will
, fro
m ti
me
to ti
me,
hol
d te
mpo
rary
col
lect
ions
of t
hrea
tene
d pl
ants
on
beha
lf of
oth
er p
artn
er o
rgan
isat
ions
(se
e P
artn
ersh
ips
belo
w)
whe
re th
ey a
re c
ompa
tible
with
the
visi
on, m
issi
on a
nd o
bjec
tives
of t
he G
arde
ns.
Par
ticul
ar a
ttent
ion
shou
ld b
e gi
ven
to: t
he r
isks
of i
ntro
duci
ng d
isea
se o
r pa
thog
ens,
ava
ilabi
lity
of s
pace
and
/ or
the
avai
labi
lity
of s
taff.
Pro
cedu
res
Con
serv
atio
n C
olle
ctio
ns w
ill b
e es
tabl
ishe
d an
d m
anag
ed in
acc
orda
nce
with
RT
BG
Ope
ratio
nal P
roce
dure
s fo
r th
e Li
ving
Col
lect
ions
and
pa
rtic
ular
ly in
line
with
the
Con
serv
atio
n C
olle
ctio
ns P
roce
dure
s.
Whe
re a
ppro
pria
te p
roce
dure
s do
no
exis
t, th
ey w
ill b
e de
velo
ped.
Pla
nt C
onse
rvat
ion
Wor
king
Gro
up
A P
lant
Con
serv
atio
n W
orki
ng G
roup
will
be
esta
blis
hed
cons
istin
g of
:
• R
TB
G H
ortic
ultu
ral B
otan
ist
• R
TB
G N
urse
ry M
anag
er
• T
SC
C C
oord
inat
or
• R
TB
G H
ortic
ultu
ralis
t res
pons
ible
for
the
Tas
man
ian
Col
lect
ion
• R
TB
G M
anag
er H
ortic
ultu
ral A
sset
s
• R
TB
G T
eam
Lea
der
Arb
oric
ultu
re
The
Pla
nt C
onse
rvat
ion
Wor
king
Gro
up w
ill r
espo
nsib
le fo
r th
e as
sess
men
t of p
ropo
sals
, dev
elop
men
t and
man
agem
ent o
f the
C
onse
rvat
ion
Col
lect
ions
as
per
the
man
agem
ent o
f Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
gen
eral
ly.
Rem
nan
t V
eget
atio
n
The
RT
BG
will
man
age
rem
nant
nat
ive
vege
tatio
n w
ithin
its
boun
darie
s se
ekin
g to
ens
ure
the
pres
erva
tion
of it
s na
tive
ecos
yste
m v
alue
s an
d its
sel
f-m
anag
ing
capa
citie
s.
For
esho
re
The
fore
shor
e ar
ea is
to b
e m
anag
ed a
s a
ecol
ogic
al r
esto
ratio
n pr
ojec
t with
the
purp
oses
of r
e-es
tabl
ishi
ng s
elf-
man
agin
g na
tura
l pr
oces
ses
and
nativ
e ec
osys
tem
val
ues.
The
fore
shor
e ar
ea w
ill b
e m
anag
ed b
y th
e R
TB
G a
nd w
here
req
uire
d in
con
junc
tion
with
the
Hob
art C
ity C
ounc
il as
set
out
in it
s M
anag
emen
t Par
tner
ship
s P
olic
y.
Nor
ther
n E
xtre
mity
The
nor
ther
n ex
trem
ity o
f the
Gar
dens
may
be
cons
ider
ed fo
r de
-acc
essi
on a
s pa
rt o
f bou
ndar
y ne
gotia
tions
or
part
ners
hip
arra
ngem
ents
w
ith th
e H
obar
t City
Cou
ncil,
pro
vide
d its
mai
nten
ance
as
a na
tura
l sys
tem
is to
be
pres
erve
d.
Que
ens
Dom
ain
The
RT
BG
will
wor
k in
par
tner
ship
with
the
Hob
art C
ity C
ounc
il to
mai
ntai
n th
e na
tura
l val
ues
of th
e Q
ueen
s D
omai
n as
set
out
in it
s M
anag
emen
t Par
tner
ship
s P
olic
y.
Tas
man
ian
See
d C
on
serv
atio
n C
entr
e
The
RT
BG
will
be
a ke
y pa
rtne
r in
the
oper
atio
n of
the
Tas
man
ian
See
d C
onse
rvat
ion
Cen
tre
(the
TS
CC
)
Pur
pose
The
pur
pose
of t
he T
SC
C is
to e
nsur
e th
e lo
ng-t
erm
sec
urity
and
con
serv
atio
n of
Tas
man
ia’s
uni
que
nativ
e flo
ra, a
s a
cont
ribut
ion
to th
e co
nser
vatio
n of
glo
bal b
iodi
vers
ity.
Rol
e of
the
RT
BG
The
RT
BG
will
:
• co
oper
ate
in g
erm
inat
ion
rese
arch
and
oth
er s
eed
stor
age
rela
ted
rese
arch
;
• pr
ovid
e su
ppor
t for
the
day-
to d
ay a
ctiv
ities
of t
he s
eed
cons
erva
tion
cent
re; a
nd in
par
ticul
ar le
nd it
s ex
pert
ise
in th
e ho
rtic
ultu
re o
f th
reat
ened
spe
cies
; and
• co
oper
ate
in th
e co
llect
ion
of s
eed
from
the
field
.
Per
iod
of In
volv
emen
t
The
RT
BG
will
see
k to
ens
ure
that
the
Tas
man
ian
See
d C
onse
rvat
ion
Cen
tre
cont
inue
s its
ope
ratio
ns b
eyon
d its
cur
rent
form
al p
roje
ct
time
fram
e of
201
0, th
roug
h in
-kin
d su
ppor
t of t
he c
entr
e an
d en
cour
agem
ent o
f sup
port
from
exi
stin
g an
d po
tent
ial p
roje
ct p
artn
ers
incl
udin
g G
over
nmen
t.
Co
nse
rvat
ion
Res
earc
h
The
RT
BG
will
par
ticip
ate
in r
esea
rch
rela
ted
to th
reat
ened
pla
nts.
Prio
ritie
s
Prio
rity
will
be
give
n to
the
cond
uct o
f res
earc
h re
gard
ing
spec
ies
of c
onse
rvat
ion
sign
ifica
nce
that
:
• in
tegr
ates
with
the
activ
ities
of t
he T
SC
C in
clud
ing
the
germ
inat
ion
and
prop
agat
ion
rese
arch
and
oth
er s
eed
stor
age/
man
agem
ent r
esea
rch;
• is
link
ed to
a r
ecov
ery
plan
as
mad
e or
ado
pted
und
er th
e T
asm
ania
n T
hrea
tene
d S
peci
es P
rote
ctio
n A
ct 1
995
and
also
the
Com
mon
wea
lth E
nviro
nmen
t Pro
tect
ion
and
Bio
dive
rsity
Con
serv
atio
n A
ct 1
999;
• fa
cilit
ates
the
rees
tabl
ishm
ent o
f thr
eate
ned
plan
ts in
the
wild
or
in r
esto
ratio
n pr
ojec
ts th
at s
eek
to p
rese
rve
the
elem
ents
of
nativ
e pl
ant c
omm
uniti
es r
athe
r th
an in
divi
dual
pla
nt s
peci
men
s; a
nd
• fa
cilit
ates
the
reco
very
of t
hrea
tene
d sp
ecie
s kn
own
from
the
Que
ens
Dom
ain.
Con
side
ratio
n w
ill b
e gi
ven
to th
e fa
cilit
atio
n of
thre
aten
ed r
esea
rch
by o
ther
s on
spe
cies
oth
er th
an th
ose
liste
d ab
ove
with
a p
refe
renc
e fo
r w
ork
rela
ted
to c
ool c
limat
e S
outh
ern
Hem
isph
ere
and
Sub
-Ant
arct
ic s
peci
es.
Dis
sem
inat
ion
of In
form
atio
n
The
RT
BG
will
con
trib
ute
to th
e as
sem
bly
and
diss
emin
atio
n of
info
rmat
ion
(e.g
. bio
logy
, pro
paga
tion,
nat
ive
habi
tat r
equi
rem
ents
) in
su
ppor
t of:
• its
inte
rnat
iona
l obl
igat
ions
to B
otan
ic G
arde
ns C
onse
rvat
ion
Inte
rnat
iona
l (B
GC
I) a
nd B
otan
ic G
arde
ns A
ustr
alia
and
New
Z
eala
nd (
BG
AN
Z);
• th
e T
asm
ania
n S
eed
Con
serv
atio
n C
entr
e;
• th
e de
velo
pmen
t of r
ecov
ery
plan
s un
der
the
Tas
man
ian
Thr
eate
ned
Spe
cies
Pro
tect
ion
Act
199
5 an
d al
so th
e C
omm
onw
ealth
E
nviro
nmen
t Pro
tect
ion
and
Bio
dive
rsity
Con
serv
atio
n A
ct 1
999;
• la
nd m
anag
ers
with
res
pons
ibili
ty fo
r th
e in
situ
con
serv
atio
n of
nat
ive
habi
tat a
nd s
peci
es; a
nd
• po
st-g
radu
ate
acad
emic
res
earc
h in
are
as th
at a
re li
nked
to th
e vi
sion
, mis
sion
and
obj
ectiv
es fo
r th
e R
TB
G.
Co
nse
rvat
ion
Par
tner
ship
s
The
RT
BG
will
dev
elop
and
par
ticip
ate
in
cons
erva
tion
activ
ities
sha
ring
its
know
ledg
e an
d sk
ills
rela
ting
to p
lant
co
nser
vatio
n w
ith lo
cal,
stat
e, n
atio
nal
and
inte
rnat
iona
l aut
horit
ies
and
appr
oved
con
serv
atio
n gr
oups
as
outli
ned
in P
olic
y 3:
Par
tner
ship
s.
Exi
stin
g P
artn
ersh
ips
The
RT
BG
will
con
tinue
to w
ork
in p
artn
ersh
ip w
ith e
xist
ing
cons
erva
tion
part
ners
on
proj
ects
that
alig
n w
ith th
e vi
sion
, mis
sion
and
ob
ject
ives
of t
he R
TB
G a
nd o
ther
asp
ects
of t
his
polic
y on
Bio
dive
rsity
and
Con
serv
atio
n.
Fut
ure
Par
tner
ship
s
Fut
ure
part
ners
hips
may
be
deve
lope
d w
ith o
ther
org
anis
atio
ns o
n a
proj
ect b
y pr
ojec
t bas
is, w
ith c
onsi
dera
tion
to th
e co
mpa
tibili
ty o
f the
pr
opos
ed p
roje
ct w
ith th
e R
TB
G’s
vis
ion,
mis
sion
and
obj
ectiv
es.
A M
OU
will
be
esta
blis
hed
with
the
Tas
man
ian
Her
bariu
m d
efin
ing
area
s of
mut
ual i
nter
est,
pote
ntia
l sup
port
an
the
part
nerin
g of
ap
prop
riate
pro
ject
s.
7 . D I R E C T I O N S F O R W A R D
A master plan (Attachment B) has been prepared indicating the recommended
physical developments for the RTBG. The master plan represents how the
Gardens might look in 20 years if all of the recommendations herein are
implemented. The master plan also recognises that many of these proposed
changes will fundamentally establish the look, feel and experience of the
Gardens over a much longer time period.
The key physical elements illustrated on the master plan are:
the identification of areas that bound the Gardens in which
the RTBG has an interest in cooperating with the relevant
owners to achieve mutual benefits;
the evolution of the living collections, and the
implementation of the Living Collections Plan, in particular
changes and additions to the existing physical layout of
collections;
improvements to the visitor facilities and services that will
enhance accessibility, the quality of the visitor experience
and interpretation of the RTBG; and
consolidation of administrative, operational and other site
functions of the RTBG, to provide more efficient and
effective management in the long term.
Of particular importance to the Living Collections Plan are the first two of the
above elements, the areas adjacent to the RTBG within which living collections
might be developed (Section 7.1) and the evolution of the living collections to
better meet the strategic aims of the Gardens (Section 7.2).
74 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
7 . 1 S P H E R E O F I N V O L V E M E N T : E X P A N S I O N O F T H E
R T B G ’ S R O L E
The issues surrounding a lack of space within the Gardens to expand
collections or activities were discussed in Section 5. The master plan
addresses opportunities for the Gardens to grow its ‘sphere of involvement in
the management of nearby areas whereon its collections might be extended
and/or its core activities better supported. The recommendations of the
master plan are supported by the various policies developed as part of the
SMP process (Attachment 1).
The principle areas where the Gardens sphere of involvement could expand in
cooperation with the Hobart City Council (Figure 7.1) are:
the Beaumaris Zoo – the zoo has previously been identified
as an area where collections with Southern Hemisphere
and Gondwanan associations could be developed;
the ‘golf course’ – this area is well located and
topographically suited to car parking provided that the
natural and cultural values of the site are appropriately
considered including through improved access and
interpretation; and
Grasslands Gully – this area presents significant potential to
present the grassy woodland and related riparian flora of
the Greater Hobart region29.
29 Note, there are a few conifers that may need to be retained if they are found to contribute to the significance of the Conifer Collection. Nonetheless, if found to have significance, the policies herein allow for their ultimate removal providing they can be replaced elsewhere in the Gardens or a nearby site.
76 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
7 . 2 E V O L U T I O N O F T H E L I V I N G C O L L E C T I O N S
The analysis of the living collections (Section5) indicates the potential to
develop new collections, renew existing, under-performing ones or to remove
irrelevant collections to allow for other uses.
The analysis of the collections and consideration of the strategic framework
suggests the identification of clear precincts within which to develop specific
types of collections and changes to the collections themselves to enhance
their value to the Gardens and its vision, mission, goals and interpretation
themes.
7.2.1 Physical Layout - Precincts
In line with the extension of the Gardens beyond its boundaries is the
opportunity to identify specific precincts in the Gardens within which to develop
particular types of collections. The principle opportunities in this regard are
shown on Figure 7.2-7.5 and include:
T A S M A N I A N A N D S O U T H E R N H E M I S P H E R E C O L L E C T I O N S
P R E C I N C T S
The identification of existing areas of the Gardens for Tasmanian and
Southern Hemisphere plant collections reflecting the diversity of vegetation
types in the State and the extent of its related cool climate Southern
Hemisphere genera (Figure 7.2) including:
the development of a Tasmanian forest eucalypt and
related vegetation at the northern end of the Gardens with
associated other Tasmanian collections developed
underneath;
the development of an area to illustrate Tasmania’s drier
and salt tolerant vegetation including heathland and
woodland species;
the development of a Tasmanian wet forests area including
an extended Tasmanian fern collection;
the redevelopment and expansion of the New Zealand
Collection; and
the expansion of the Gondwana collection (as far as can be
done within the limited confines of its existing location).
78 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
The master plan also identifies improvements to access across the Lower
Domain Highway that would facilitate better use of the foreshore through:
the relocation of the Sub-Antarctic collection and the
addition of alpine and sub-alpine collections within a
purpose built visitor attraction at Pavilion Point30;
the development of a saltmarsh collection on the foreshore
using a system of ‘floating beds’ as display areas (soil-filled
structural geo-fabric suspended from floating or pile
supported walkways could provide a suitable media/setting
for growing such plants, similar to the way in which a
sphagnum mat supports plant growth in a bog – use of such
a system overcome the need for the filling of the river); and
the development of the foreshore as a ‘collection’ of typical
Tasmanian foreshore species (as opposed to simply
rehabilitating the area, this may involve introduction of
coastal species from elsewhere in the State).
C U L T U R A L A N D O R N A M E N T A L C O L L E C T I O N S P R E C I N C T
At the same time various areas of the Gardens are to be managed for their
cultural and ornamental collections and heritage values (Figure 7.3) including:
the Significant Tree Collection (note this collection is spread
throughout the Gardens);
Conifer Collection at the main entry and along the boundary
with Lower Domain Road;
the Palm Collection;
the Deciduous Tree Collection;
the Japanese Garden;
the various other collections spread through the centre of
the Gardens (i.e. Cottage Garden, Conservatory, Bedding
Plants, Lily Pond, etc.); and
the upper and lower lawns.
30 Subject to a business case being prepared that supports such a venture.
80 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
E D U C A T I O N A N D E C O N O M I C C O L L E C T I O N S P R E C I N C T S
Figure 7.4 identifies the areas identified for further development of educational
and economic collections (i.e. collections with a demonstration focus). The
proposed area correlates strongly with the existing Easy Access Garden, the
WSUD garden, the Education Pod and Pete’s Patch. These collections have
strong affinities with the interpretation themes around sustainability and the
early history of the Gardens as set out in the RTBG Interpretation Plan 2008-
2013. Economic collections also have a strong heritage link to Government
House and the use of adjacent areas there (historically and into the present
day).
The map shows the proposed area for the Education and Economic
Collections Precincts. These areas are proposed to include:
purpose built facilities will be constructed in support of these
collections including classrooms, purpose built beds,
glasshouses, etc. targeted to use by visiting groups;
a children’s garden, specifically targeted to educational
messages;
perennial and annual vegetable plots (Pete’s Patch) and
other crop and vegetable plots (with an emphasis on food
plants, the home vegetable garden, heirloom and heritage
species);
the Herb Garden;
the heritage apple collection and possibly other orchard
species (fruit and nut);
collections focused on sustainability (i.e. WSUD);
areas to demonstrate sustainable horticultural practices (i.e.
composting, integrated pest management, etc.); and
some limited area for ‘community gardens’ (or some variant
thereof).
Location of the education and economic collections in this area has strong
heritage links to Government House and the use of adjacent areas there
(historically and in the present day).
82 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
O P E R A T I O N S P R E C I N C T S
Figure 7.5 shows the operational areas of the Gardens being retained in their
current locations until such time as space becomes available elsewhere. In
the interim, rationalisation of the use of the Nursery area, the moving of potted
to collections to in ground locations, the amalgamation of administrative
functions and the removal of car parking from the area would result in better
utilisation of the available space.
Figure 7.5 also shows the retention of the northern storage area for the bulk
storage of garden and building materials. Whilst the northern storage area
remains some distance from the nursery, there were no suitable options
available for relocating these activities elsewhere in the grounds. Nor is there
scope to shift the depot to the Nursery where similarly there are spatial
constraints and the additional potential impacts of noise from the depot
operations on residential areas on the Government House estate.
Figure 7.5 shows the introduction of an Eastern Storage area at the far
extremity of the main east-west path. There is scope in this area for the
development of a small, discrete area for the storage of topsoil, mulches and
other soft materials. Access to the area would be limited to the smaller of the
RTBG’s vehicles (golf carts). Development in this area could be visually
sensitive if, in the future, access is developed along this path to the foreshore.
In response, screening vegetation should be retained and/or intensified to
ensure the visitor experience is not impacted on.
Some benefit will accrue to operations if Lower Domain Road is closed to
through traffic, as the road could be used as an alternative route for service
vehicles between the depot, the Nursery or other parts of the Gardens (see
Figure 7.7 below). Native vegetation to the north of the depot provides some
visual screening from the highway and the Eastern Shore31.
31 Albeit this would be retained whether the land was managed by Council or the RTBG.
84 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
7.2.2 Changes to Collections
The need to manage and maintain the living collections as individual groupings
of plants is also a critical issue to be addressed by the RTBG. Table 7.1
adapts the table used to analyse the collections and reflects the intended
precinctual developments described above, showing for each collection:
future directions including whether or not the collection
should be retained in size and location, retained and
expanded in size, upgraded in content or retained but
moved to a new location or de-accessed;
comments on the future directions expanding on the
opportunities for each; and
the existing unweighted ratings for each attribute and
current total scores, highlighting where the greatest benefits
can be derived from upgrading the collections.
Note within the table, that upgrade refers to improvements that can be made
within the collection to enhance its rating against a particular attribute. It is not
practical to expect that all low scores can be raised. For instance, scores
against the heritage attribute are inherently fixed, that is unless a particular
bed was reconstructed using historic precedent.
Highlighted areas are, therefore, considered to be the priority areas where it
would be most beneficial for the Gardens to target its efforts.
Chapter 7 Directions Forward 85
Table 7.1 Living Collections Directions (A3)
86 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
Table 7.1 Living Collections Directions (A3)
Chapter 7 Directions Forward 87
The principle recommendations from the analysis of the collections are to:
emphasise the introduction on species of conservation
significance and of known provenance;
recognise the strong relationship of the Tasmanian and
Southern Hemisphere collections to the vision and mission
of the Gardens and the need to retain and expand these
collections for their potential benefits;
de-access the Asian Woodland and Conifer Cultivars
collections and replace them with other species or
collections that support the vision, mission, goals, strategies
and interpretation plan;
significantly redevelopment of the Sub-Antarctic (subject to
a business case) and Tasmanian Ferns collections as major
visitor attractions;
expand the opportunities for the development of economic
plant collections; and
improve the presentation of WSUD garden and other native
plant collections to encourage visitors that such collections
have aesthetic value.
Importantly, the table also highlights the significant need for improved
interpretation and those collections where greatest benefits might be gained in
doing so. The RTBG Interpretation Plan 2008-2013 identifies:
four primary interpretation themes that convey the what
makes the RTBG distinctive and three secondary themes,
that expand on these principle ideas adding depth and
richness to the potential interpretive messages; and
a suite of media best targeted to the RTBG’s audiences and
assessed against the themes they may best be used to
illustrate.
Table 7.2, from the Interpretation Plan, highlights those collections and the
principle and secondary interpretation themes with which they have the
strongest correlation. The findings from the table suggest how each collection
might be targeted to a theme for best effect in reaching the Gardens
audiences.
Th
eme
No
.P
1P
2P
3P
4S
1S
2S
3
Th
eme
Co
nce
pt
Bio
div
ersi
tyH
ort
icu
ltu
ral
Lea
der
Fu
ll C
ircl
eC
on
vict
L
abo
ur
vs
No
w
Mak
e a
Dif
fere
nce
-E
nvi
ron
-m
enta
l C
han
ge
Gar
den
s as
F
amily
Insp
irat
ion
an
d
San
ctu
ary
Att
rib
ute
s fr
om
Liv
ing
C
olle
ctio
ns
anal
ysis
ad
dre
ssed
by
Th
eme
(so
me
attr
ibu
tes
rela
te t
o m
ult
iple
th
emes
)
Reg
ion
al/
Co
nse
rvat
ion
Bo
tan
ical
/ S
ite
Su
itab
ility
His
tori
cal/
Inte
rpre
tati
on
/ E
du
cati
on
/
His
tori
cal/
Ho
rtic
ult
ure
(i
ncl
ud
es
Aes
thet
ics)
Reg
ion
al/
Co
nse
rvat
ion
Tou
rism
/ R
ecre
atio
nal
/ C
om
mer
cial
/ H
ort
icu
ltu
re
(in
clu
des
A
esth
etic
s)
Sp
irit
ual
/ H
ort
icu
ltu
re
(in
clu
des
A
esth
etic
s)
CA
TE
GO
RY
FO
CU
SC
OL
LE
CT
ION
Tasm
ania
nG
eogr
aphi
cal F
ocus
Sub
anta
rctic
Gre
ater
Hob
art
Eas
t Coa
stTa
smai
nan
Rem
nant
Gra
ssla
ndTa
xono
mic
Foc
usE
pacr
idac
eae
Tasm
ania
n F
erns
Dem
onst
ratio
n F
ocus
WS
UD
Gar
den
Her
itage
Foc
usF
renc
h M
emor
ial
Hor
ticul
tura
l Foc
usV
isito
r C
entr
e B
eds
Co
nse
rvat
ion
an
d R
esea
rch
Geo
grap
hica
l Foc
us
For
esho
reR
emna
nt G
rass
land
So
uth
ern
Hem
isp
her
eG
eogr
aphi
cal F
ocus
New
Zea
land
Gon
dwan
a Te
rrac
es
Taxo
nom
ic F
ocus
Hor
ticul
tura
l Foc
usP
rote
aC
ult
ura
l an
d O
rnam
enta
lH
ortic
ultu
ral F
ocus
Con
serv
ator
y
Con
ifer
Cul
tivar
s
Fuc
hsia
Hou
seP
alm
col
lect
ion
Asi
an W
oodl
and
Sal
via
Col
lect
ion
Mag
nolia
ceae
Gre
y F
olia
ge p
lant
sTa
xono
mic
Foc
usE
ucal
ypt L
awn
Con
ifer
Spe
cies
Dem
onst
ratio
n F
ocus
Her
b G
arde
nP
ete'
s P
atch
/Eco
nom
icE
asy
Acc
ess
Gar
den
Cac
ti &
Suc
cule
nts
Her
itage
Foc
usH
erita
ge A
pple
sS
igni
fican
t Tre
esC
otta
ge G
arde
nG
eogr
aphi
cal F
ocus
Japa
nese
Gar
den
Chi
nese
Aus
tral
ian
Col
lect
ions
mar
ked
in y
ello
w to
be
de-
acce
ssed
or
sign
ifica
ntly
re
-foc
used
Tab
le 7
.2 I
nter
pret
atio
n T
hem
es R
elat
ed to
Liv
ing
Col
lect
ions
Bed
ding
pla
nts
- in
clud
ing
Flo
ral C
lock
Dec
iduo
us T
rees
– (
elm
s an
d oa
ks)
Rho
dode
ndro
ns &
Cam
ellia
sM
ixed
Bor
der
(Frie
nds
Bor
der,
Rill
s, L
ily
Tasm
ania
n S
eed
Con
serv
atio
n C
entr
eC
onse
rvat
ion
Col
lect
ions
(P
otte
d)
Sou
ther
n H
emis
pher
e (P
otte
d)S
outh
ern
Hem
isph
ere
Con
ifers
(P
otte
d)
Chapter 7 Directions Forward 89
Amongst its other recommendations, the RTBG Interpretation Plan 2008-2013
also identified the opportunity to develop a children’s garden to address
opportunities to reach this important market segment.
90 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
In regards to the Sub-Antarctic House and the Fernery, the SMP proposes
development of these into major visitor attractions as follows.
S U B - A N T A R C T I C C O O L T E M P E R A T U R E C O L L E C T I O N S
The SMP proposes the idea of a major visitor attraction at Pavilion Point to
house the Sub-Antarctic Collection and other Cool Temperature Collections
(alpine and sub-alpine) subject to the development of a business case. The
proposal builds on the popularity of the existing Sub-Antarctic Collection and
addresses the issue of the lack of appropriate conditions in the Gardens for
the growing of cool temperature species.
The attractiveness of the site lies in its riverside setting with outstanding views
to the eastern shore, access to the water’s edge and potential access by boat
from elsewhere in the estuary. Heating and cooling systems could benefit
from the use of reverse cycle technology drawing on the cool river water
nearby.
The development proposal would be made more attractive if the flora
collections could be combined with fauna, particularly penguins native to the
Sub-Antarctic collections represented in the building and/or other relevant
fauna species (including other birds, insects, marine invertebrates, etc)32.
Whilst the site is difficult to access by car, this could be overcome by:
improving public transport to the site either by bus or by rail;
encouraging access via the inter-city cycleway;
linking the site to the Gardens proper by the proposed
overpass (see Accessible Paths above);
increasing the size and configuration of the lower Gardens
car park (see Arrival, Parking and Entry);
establishing the proposed car park on the golf course (in
this scenario visitors would pass through the Gardens and
cross the proposed footbridge to the development site; and
improvements to the road junction at the Domain Highway.
32 The Biodome in Montreal is a good example of the concept proposed here. The Biodome allows visitors to walk through replicas of four ecosystems found in the Americas. A variety of animals live in each simulated habitat.
Chapter 7 Directions Forward 91
T A S M A N I A N F E R N H O U S E
The SMP proposes that the Fernery could be significantly extended and
upgraded to become a far more significant attraction within the Gardens along
the lines of the Evolution House at the Kew Gardens. The upgraded fern
house would involve replacement of the existing fernery with a new,
architecturally designed building that extends the amount of covered area.
The bulk of the enclosed space would house extensive plantings of some of
the earliest known plants: ferns and cycads, lichens, selaginellas, horsetails
and mosses and other bryophytes. Tasmania is home to: nine aquatic
Pteridophyte species (ferns and fern allies) that require permanent submersion
or temporary inundation that could be accommodated in a new fernery. Other
areas in an expanded could include related rainforest and wet forest plant
species. In contrast to the emphasis on species requiring wet, moist
conditions, Tasmania is also home to 15 species that are specially adapted to
survive in seasonally dry habitats which could also be accommodated in part
of an expanded fern house33.
All plants would of known provenance and feature species of conservation in
line with the policies herein.
The whole of the new Fernery would be accessible via a network of paths
linked by stairs and or inclinators or mini-lifts. Moisture soaked, stone walls
could provide a rugged appearance and backdrop to the otherwise soft feel of
the fern and moss beds.
Waterfalls, overhead sprinklers and misting devices would heighten the
experience of the space.
Within the fern house spaces would be created where gatherings could occur
with suitable backgrounds for photographs. Small shelters might also be
created in which visitors could gather out of the mist. Temperature, humidity
and soil moisture displays could aid understanding of the environment in which
ferns live.
Interpretation would be linked to the themes identified in the Interpretation
Plan, particularly around issues of biodiversity and the ancient quality of ferns
and related non-vascular species.
33 Lang, C. 2005. “Proposal for the Development of an Expanded Fernery Display House – A Case Study Lead-In Document” unpublished proposal to the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens.
A T T A C H M E N T A T H E M A N A G E M E N T F R A M E W O R K F O R T H E R T B G
The Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Strategic Master Plan 2008-2013
defines the strategic framework within which the Gardens are to be managed
including its vision, mission and goals as follows (Figure A1).
Stated in full here, much of the strategic framework has direct relevance to the
development and on-going management of the living collections.
A . 1 R T B G V I S I O N
The Vision of the RTBG is
“The Vision of the RTBG is to create and maintain an
exceptional garden that enriches Tasmania’s social and
cultural life, educates the community about the importance
of plants and contributes to the conservation of the flora of
Tasmania and the world.”
The vision
sets aspirational aims for a reputation of excellence within
the international arena;
provides a focus on Tasmania as the locus for the
operations and the identity of the Gardens (i.e. its sense of
place but also as a focus for collections); and
specifies that the Gardens contribute to flora conservation
initiatives.
Vis
ion
Mis
sion
Goa
ls
Pol
icie
s
Act
ion
Str
ateg
ies
Inte
rpre
tatio
n T
hem
es
Fig
ure
A.1
Str
ateg
ic M
anag
emen
t Fra
mew
ork
Attachment A RTBG Strategic Framework A3
A . 2 R T B G M I S S I O N
The transformation of vision into reality is an active process in which the
organisation’s mission is a central guiding force, therefore,
In common with other botanical gardens, the RTBG will:
act as an ex situ repository for species of
conservation significance and participate in other
conservation programs aimed at preserving bio-
diversity in the world; and
incorporate plants of an economic value to the
community.
In achieving its mission, the RTBG will create and maintain
core/priority plant collections based on Tasmania’s flora and
associated cool climate flora from the southern hemisphere.
In respect to its history, the RTBG will maintain:
the Gardens in a manner that recognises and
interprets the layered history of the site from
Aboriginal times through to the present;
identified heritage collections of plants that are of
State, national and international significance for
their historic heritage values; and
the place in a manner that respects its important
landscape and sense of place values.
The mission reiterates the aspiration to excellence, identifies the importance of
the Gardens to the Tasmanian community, provides focus on the experience
of the place through education, emphasises the role of the RTBG in
conservation and identifies the core values that underpin the place as
Tasmania’s botanic gardens i.e. Tasmanian endemic flora and associated cool
climate plants from the southern hemisphere and the heritage values of the
site.
A4 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
A . 3 R T B G M A N A G E M E N T G O A L S A N D S T R A T E G I E S
In the application of its values to the achievement of its vision and mission,
three objectives are recognised. These goals and objectives describe the
outcomes that the RTBG is trying to achieve and establish the key strategies
arising .
Goal 1. To sustainably manage the core values of the RTBG as Tasmania’s
botanical garden.
Strategy 1.1. Insure the RTBG is internationally recognised
for its collections of southern hemisphere cool climate
plants with a particular emphasis on Tasmania’s flora.
Strategy 1.2. Respect, conserve and interpret the cultural
values of the site.
Strategy 1.3. Support and be involved in world
conservation programs for the world’s flora.
Strategy 1.4. Be a community leader in sustainable
environmental programs.
Strategy 1.5. Engage in appropriate research related to the
conservation of species of conservation significance from
southern hemisphere cool climate areas with a particular
emphasis on Tasmania’s flora.
This goal addresses the definition of the RTBG as a ‘Tasmanian botanical
garden’ (see Section 1) and recognises the significant values embodied in the
Gardens and that these values must be managed in a sustainable manner if
the SMP is to be considered successful.
This goal also addresses a principle requirement to maintain the integrity of
the RTBG as a true botanical gardens through appropriate curation of living
collections, involvement in the conservation of the world’s flora and the
conduct of targeted research.
Goal 2. To promote and manage the Gardens to ensure its users have the
opportunity to attain a quality experience of the place and its values.
Strategy 2.1 To achieve excellence in horticultural and
botanical education, training and extension programs;
Attachment A RTBG Strategic Framework A5
Strategy 2.2 To communicate the relevance, importance
and history of the RTBG, its programs, people and context
through meaningful and valued interpretation;
Strategy 2.3 To be a recognised deliverer of quality
programs, products and services;
Strategy 2.4 To position the RTBG as one of the top
Tasmanian attractions in terms of number of visits and
levels of awareness;
Strategy 2.5 To develop the built environment to facilitate
the experience of the Gardens
Strategy 2.6 To maintain the built environment of the RTBG
in a manner that addresses requirements for basic function,
safety and public amenity.
This goal addresses the use value of the Garden and the benefits to be
derived from the successful management of the RTBG as an education and
training centre, a community asset and a tourism destination.
The management of the visitor experience is directly related to people’s
expectations for the Gardens as a destination for daily life and/or for tourism.
Goal 3. To ensure there is sufficient capacity to sustainably manage34 the
place.
Strategy 3.1 To ensure that the legislative requirements for
the operations of the Gardens are effectively met.
Strategy 3.2 To ensure that the funding available to the
Gardens is adequate to realise its vision and mission.
Strategy 3.3 To deliver innovative, proactive and
sustainable business practices to support and enhance
RTBG programs.
Strategy 3.4 To provide a safe and enriching work and
social environment for staff, stakeholders and visitors.
This goal addresses the core operational activities of the Gardens and
recognises that the RTBG has a responsibility to achieve a consistent and
integrated approach to the management of the Gardens and that to achieve
34 Manage being defined as the day to day activities which serve to direct or control use so as to protect the values of the place, to ensure the safety of users and/or to improve their access to the area.
A6 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
this the RTBG must have the legislative power, the organisational and
procedural capacities and the funding necessary to implement, monitor and
evaluate the strategies set out in the SMP.
A . 4 T H E P O L I C Y F R A M E W O R K
A range of policies, including those contained in the LCP (highlighted), assist
in achievement of the RTBG’s goals as shown in Table A.1.
Policies provide principles, standards and guidelines and direct the creation of
procedures that apply in the operations of the Gardens. Policies have no
statutory weight, but supply criteria and guidance in setting a course of action.
The policies may be added to as demand dictates or amended as ‘policy
learning’ occurs.
Policies are different to ‘regulations’ that prohibit, control or allow activities
within the Gardens. Regulations have legislative force arising from the Royal
Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Act 2002. Part 3 of the Act establishes a range
of regulations for the Care, Control and Management of the Gardens. Part 4,
Section 29 allows for the establishment of new regulations for the purposes of
the Act.
Policies are also different to ‘procedures’, the latter being developed as tools
for the implementation of policies. Procedures are developed by the staff of
the RTBG and detail the content or step by step processes that are
undertaken in relation to the tasks of managing and maintaining the Gardens.
Attachment A RTBG Strategic Framework A7
Goals Policy Areas Policies
1. To sustainably manage the core values of the RTBG as Tasmania’s botanic gardens.
Core Values Policy Living Collections
Biodiversity Conservation (includes research)
Education
Heritage Conservation
2. To promote and manage the RTBG to ensure its users have the opportunity to attain a quality experience of the place and its values.
Visitor Experience Policy
Interpretation
Visitor Survey
Visitor Facilities (includes access and new development)
Events and Activities
3. To ensure there is sufficient capacity to sustainably manage the place.
Capacity to Manage Policy
Land Acquisition
Funding and Resources
Management Partnerships
Future Use and Development
Coordinated Planning
Monitoring and Review of Plans and Policies and Procedures
Operations and Asset Management (includes water use)
Occupational Health and Safety and other Personnel Management and Employment Policies35
Table A.1. RTBG Policy Framework
35 The RTBG is subject to the Health and Safety Policies of the Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment. Policies include but are not limited to: Remote and Isolated Work Safety Policy, OHSMS Management and Coordination Policy, Incident Accident Reporting Policy, Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Control Safety Policy, Dangerous Good and Hazardous Substances Safety Policy. The RTBG also works within Governmental policies related to personnel management and employment.
A8 Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens Living Collection Plan and Policy
A . 5 I N T E R P R E T A T I O N T H E M E S
Themes sit at the heart of the interpretive program. They form a set of
‘launching pads’ from which the entire program is developed and delivered.
They allow for considerable creativity in developing the program, providing for
varying levels of layering and depth, while weaving together a range of topics
– all geared to the delivery media, audience and location.
Themes are presented with a range of underpinning ideas for context. The
diversity of these underpinning ideas indicates the considerable opportunity for
rich layering of interpretive content.
A.5.1 Primary Themes
The following themes are considered primary because together they convey
what makes RTBG distinctive in relation to other natural or cultural areas and
other botanical gardens in Australia and overseas. In this way, they contribute
to RTBG’s competitive advantage. They establish the key ideas about RTBG
and what ‘makes it tick’ for the audience most interested in interpretation –
International & National Visitors.
In addition, P1 and P2 communicate that RTBG is leading edge, has an
incredibly valuable role that no-one else can replicate, and is sharing its
knowledge and expertise with the local community and specialist
‘communities’ nationally and overseas.
A.5.2 Secondary Themes
Secondary themes are no less important, in their own right, than primary
themes. However, they either put ‘flesh on the bones’ – communicating the
depth and richness of the RTBG experience – or are less relevant to the main
interpretive audience.
PR
IMA
RY
TH
EM
ES
U
ND
ER
PIN
NIN
G ID
EA
S
RA
TIO
NA
LE
P1
With
out t
he w
ork
of th
e R
oyal
Tas
man
ian
Bot
anic
al
Gar
dens
, our
bio
dive
rsity
w
ould
suf
fer
– an
d so
wou
ld
we.
RT
BG
is m
ore
than
a b
eaut
iful p
ark
– b
ecau
se p
lant
s ar
e cr
itica
l to
life,
it’s
hel
ping
pre
serv
e qu
ality
of l
ife fo
r T
asm
ania
ns a
nd o
ther
s th
roug
h pr
otec
ting
our
nativ
e sp
ecie
s.
Its r
ole
in c
onse
rvin
g T
asm
ania
n an
d ot
her
cool
clim
ate
Sou
ther
n H
emis
pher
e sp
ecie
s is
par
t of a
maj
or w
orld
fo
rce
in c
onse
rvat
ion
e.g.
bio
logy
and
pro
paga
tion
of s
elec
ted
rare
and
thre
aten
ed s
peci
es in
con
junc
tion
with
th
e D
epar
tmen
t of P
lant
Sci
ence
at t
he U
nive
rsity
of T
asm
ania
; pro
paga
tion
of r
are
and
thre
aten
ed s
peci
es fo
r re
vege
tatio
n of
min
e si
tes;
par
t of t
he M
illen
nium
See
d B
ank
proj
ect,
colle
ctin
g se
ed fr
om r
are
and
prot
ecte
d T
asm
ania
n flo
ra.
It no
t onl
y pl
ays
an a
ctiv
e ro
le in
con
serv
atio
n of
Tas
man
ian
flora
but
con
trib
utes
to th
e kn
owle
dge
and
skill
ba
nk o
f oth
er o
rgan
isat
ions
and
indi
vidu
als.
The
exp
erie
nce
wor
ld-w
ide
show
s th
at b
otan
ical
gar
dens
like
the
RT
BG
are
piv
otal
in m
aint
aini
ng p
lant
di
vers
ity a
t a ti
me
whe
n w
e ar
e se
eing
the
grea
test
rat
e of
spe
cies
ext
inct
ion
in e
arth
’s h
isto
ry. M
ore
than
2,5
00
bota
nica
l gar
dens
glo
bally
hav
e al
mos
t 30%
of t
he w
orld
’s p
lant
div
ersi
ty. N
o pl
ants
, no
peop
le!
Tas
man
ia h
as ic
onic
spe
cies
that
are
vul
nera
ble.
RT
BG
is th
e la
st r
epos
itory
for
som
e pl
ants
und
er th
reat
. T
asm
ania
’s fl
ora
is d
istin
ctiv
e an
d ha
s G
ondw
anan
con
nect
ions
.
RT
BG
is p
art o
f a g
loba
l net
wor
k an
d is
wor
king
with
par
tner
s lo
cally
.
The
Tas
man
ian
See
d C
onse
rvat
ion
Cen
tre
is in
trin
sic
to th
e ex
-situ
con
serv
atio
n of
Tas
man
ian
spec
ies.
Bio
dive
rsity
mat
ters
! All
life
depe
nds
on p
lant
s ye
t pla
nts
are
an a
t-ris
k re
sour
ce. P
lant
s ar
e al
so th
e ba
sis
for
mos
t eco
-sys
tem
s. P
lant
s ha
ve p
laye
d a
key
role
in h
uman
his
tory
(fo
od, a
rt, b
io-p
rosp
ectin
g, tr
ade,
res
ourc
es
etc.
).
The
gar
dens
hav
e pl
ayed
and
con
tinue
to p
lay
an im
port
ant r
ole
in th
e ex
chan
ge o
f pla
nts
with
oth
er s
ites
arou
nd A
ustr
alia
and
the
wor
ld a
nd th
is c
ontin
ues
toda
y w
ith th
e S
eed
Ban
k.
We
can
lear
n ab
out t
he p
urpo
ses
for
plan
ts e
.g. m
edic
inal
, foo
d, o
ther
eco
nom
ic p
urpo
ses,
etc
.
The
col
lect
ions
of t
he R
TB
G il
lust
rate
the
conn
ectio
ns b
etw
een
Tas
man
ia’s
flor
a, o
ther
Sou
ther
n H
emis
pher
e flo
ra a
nd th
e an
cien
t flo
ra o
f Gon
dwan
a
Enc
ompa
sses
thre
e le
vels
– th
e ‘b
ig p
ictu
re’ o
r ge
neric
im
port
ance
of p
lant
s; p
oint
of
diffe
renc
e fo
r R
TB
G; a
nd s
cope
fo
r a
rang
e of
det
aile
d co
nten
t.
Link
s to
oth
er lo
cal a
ttrac
tions
th
at fe
atur
e T
asm
ania
n/
Gon
dwan
an p
lant
s, s
uch
as
Mou
nt W
ellin
gton
.
P2
The
Roy
al B
otan
ical
G
arde
ns is
a le
ader
in
Tas
man
ian
hort
icul
tura
l pr
actic
es, o
peni
ng th
e w
orld
of
plan
ts fo
r yo
u.
RT
BG
pla
ys a
n im
port
ant r
ole
in tr
aini
ng th
e bo
tani
sts
and
hort
icul
tura
lists
of t
he fu
ture
, hel
ping
to e
nsur
e th
at
exce
llenc
e in
Tas
man
ian
hort
icul
tura
l pra
ctic
es a
nd fl
ora
cons
erva
tion
is m
aint
aine
d.
It al
so e
xcite
s, in
spire
s an
d ed
ucat
es p
eopl
e ab
out g
row
ing
plan
ts.
The
RT
BG
hor
ticul
tura
l pra
ctic
es a
re n
ot ju
st a
bout
edi
ble
plan
ts e
.g. i
t has
cul
tivat
ed s
ome
Tas
man
ian
spec
ies
neve
r cu
ltiva
ted
befo
re. I
t is
the
only
pla
ce in
the
wor
ld g
row
ing
Sub
anta
rctic
flor
a in
a c
ontr
olle
d en
viro
nmen
t.
Its h
ortic
ultu
ral t
hera
py p
rogr
am w
as o
ne o
f the
firs
t in
Aus
tral
ia.
Fro
m th
e ea
rly d
evel
opm
ent o
f Van
Die
men
’s L
and
– p
artic
ular
ly fr
om th
e pe
riod
whe
n R
TB
G c
ame
unde
r th
e au
spic
es o
f the
Roy
al S
ocie
ty o
f Van
Die
men
’s L
and
for
Hor
ticul
ture
, Bot
any
and
the
Adv
ance
men
t of S
cien
ce
– it
has
been
a fo
cus
for
the
isla
nd’s
hor
ticul
tura
l res
earc
h an
d pr
actic
es (
linki
ng to
ear
ly te
chno
logy
, suc
h as
A
rthu
r W
all).
The
ran
ge o
f col
lect
ions
and
pla
nts
refle
cts
an im
men
se w
orld
of p
lant
s e.
g. a
t a r
ecen
t Wor
ld H
arm
ony
Day
, at
leas
t one
pla
nt r
epre
sent
ing
alm
ost e
ach
of m
ore
than
80
mig
rant
com
mun
ities
was
iden
tifie
d.
Rel
ates
to s
harin
g kn
owle
dge
and
expe
rtis
e an
d in
this
way
, be
ing
dire
ctly
rel
evan
t to
the
loca
l com
mun
ity.
P3
The
sto
ry o
f the
Gar
dens
ha
s go
ne fu
ll ci
rcle
, fro
m
surv
ival
on
a lo
cal s
cale
bac
k th
en to
the
surv
ival
of e
very
on
e of
us
in th
e fu
ture
.
The
site
beg
an w
ith a
focu
s on
sur
viva
l, th
roug
h fo
od g
athe
ring
and
food
pro
duct
ion
for
subs
iste
nce.
Thi
s le
d to
in
trod
uctio
n of
exo
tic p
lant
s fo
r th
e co
lony
and
has
now
ret
urne
d to
a fo
cus
on m
ore
glob
al s
urvi
val –
the
co
nser
vatio
n of
Tas
man
ian
plan
ts a
s pa
rt o
f ret
aini
ng th
e w
orld
’s b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
nsur
ing
the
ongo
ing
surv
ival
an
d w
ellb
eing
of a
ll of
us.
The
his
tory
of h
uman
occ
upat
ion
of th
e G
arde
ns g
oes
back
mor
e th
an 3
5,00
0 ye
ars
to th
e or
igin
al T
asm
ania
n A
borig
inal
inha
bita
nts.
The
Mou
hene
enne
r pe
ople
sou
rced
she
llfis
h fr
om th
e D
erw
ent R
iver
and
food
stuf
fs
from
loca
l pla
nts
on th
e si
te a
nd g
athe
red
ther
e to
coo
k an
d ea
t it.
The
Brit
ish
then
use
d th
e si
te in
the
early
180
0s, i
n th
e fle
dglin
g co
lony
of V
an D
iem
en’s
Lan
d, a
s pa
rt o
f a
farm
. T
he th
en-G
over
nor
Sor
ell r
efus
ed to
rec
ogni
se th
e tit
le fo
r th
e fa
rm a
nd p
art o
f it b
ecam
e a
Gov
ernm
ent
Gar
den.
Thi
s in
itial
pha
se w
as fo
cuse
d on
sub
sist
ence
in a
new
, rem
ote
settl
emen
t thr
ough
pro
duct
ion
of
edib
le p
lant
s.
The
nex
t mai
n ph
ase
was
its
deve
lopm
ent a
nd e
xpan
sion
, und
er th
e au
thor
ity o
f the
Roy
al S
ocie
ty o
f Van
Cul
tura
l her
itage
, cou
ched
in a
m
essa
ge th
at r
elat
es to
us
toda
y, is
the
focu
s. T
his
links
to
P1.
36 F
rom
Roy
al T
asm
ania
n B
otan
ical
Gar
dens
The
mat
ic H
isto
ry, p
repa
red
in 2
007
by H
isto
rian
Lind
y S
crip
ps a
s pa
rt o
f the
RT
BG
Con
serv
atio
n M
anag
emen
t Pla
n.
Die
men
’s L
and
for
Hor
ticul
ture
, Bot
any
and
the
Adv
ance
men
t of S
cien
ce, a
s pa
rt o
f a th
irst f
or k
now
ledg
e. T
he
focu
s sh
ifted
to:
shar
ing
of s
peci
men
s, s
cien
ce a
nd r
esea
rch,
cul
tivat
ion
of “
usef
ul p
lant
s”, a
nd a
cclim
atis
atio
n an
d su
pply
of t
rees
, fru
its a
nd p
lant
s in
trod
uced
to th
e co
lony
.
Mem
bers
of t
he s
ocie
ty h
ad p
rivile
ged
acce
ss fo
r a
num
ber
of y
ears
but
by
1848
the
Gar
dens
wer
e fr
eely
av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
and
bec
ame
a po
pula
r pl
ace
for
recr
eatio
n an
d ed
ucat
ion
The
Gar
dens
fluc
tuat
ed, w
ith p
erio
ds o
f bei
ng r
un d
own
inte
rspe
rsed
with
per
iods
of r
evita
lisat
ion.
By
the
early
19
00s,
a fo
cus
was
em
ergi
ng o
n fa
cilit
ies
for
visi
tors
suc
h as
“a
retir
ing
plac
e fo
r la
dies
and
chi
ldre
n” a
nd
“…ta
bles
pro
vide
, and
a b
rick
firep
lace
ere
cted
, with
woo
d an
d w
ater
at h
and.
Vis
itors
are
now
abl
e to
boi
l the
ir ke
ttles
…”.
36
Thr
ough
the
late
180
0s, t
he G
arde
ns p
rovi
ded
thou
sand
s of
pla
nts
for
land
scap
e de
velo
pmen
t thr
ough
out
Tas
man
ia, i
nclu
ding
Fra
nklin
Squ
are
in H
obar
t, C
atar
act G
orge
and
Por
t Art
hur.
All
of th
e bu
ilt h
erita
ge h
as it
s ow
n st
ory
to te
ll (e
.g. A
rthu
r W
all,
Frie
nds
Cot
tage
, Con
serv
ator
y). A
nd s
o ha
s th
e bu
ilt h
erita
ge th
at h
as d
isap
pear
ed o
r is
out
of s
ight
(th
ere
are
man
y la
yers
her
e).
The
pla
nts
also
hav
e m
any
stor
ies
to te
ll –
not j
ust b
otan
ical
but
als
o re
latin
g to
soc
ial h
isto
ry.
The
Gar
dens
are
a p
rodu
ct o
f a c
ontin
ually
-evo
lvin
g la
ndsc
ape.
The
y ha
ve a
lway
s be
en a
nd a
re a
‘wor
k in
pr
ogre
ss’,
right
bac
k to
the
early
day
s w
hen
they
wer
e us
ed b
y G
over
nmen
t Hou
se a
s a
farm
and
incl
udin
g th
e re
clam
atio
n of
the
bay
as p
art o
f the
Gar
dens
site
.
The
y ar
e on
e of
onl
y si
x ‘R
oyal
’ bot
anic
al g
arde
ns in
the
wor
ld (
alon
g w
ith K
ew a
nd E
dinb
urgh
in th
e U
.K.,
Ham
ilton
in C
anad
a, S
ydne
y an
d M
elbo
urne
).
P4
It to
ok u
nski
lled
conv
ict l
abou
r to
est
ablis
h th
ese
gard
ens
– an
d ta
kes
spec
ialis
t ski
lls a
nd k
now
ledg
e to
kee
p th
em th
rivin
g no
w.
The
Gar
dens
wer
e pa
rt o
f the
Van
Die
men
’s L
and
conv
ict s
yste
m, w
ith th
e la
bour
forc
e la
rgel
y co
nsis
ting
of
conv
icts
unt
il 18
58.
The
gar
dens
may
ulti
mat
ely
be a
pro
duct
of g
ente
el V
icto
rian
idea
ls a
nd a
spira
tions
. Yet
it w
as th
e lo
wes
t lev
el
of e
arly
soc
iety
that
bro
ught
the
idea
ls to
frui
tion.
The
ava
ilabi
lity
of c
heap
, uns
kille
d co
nvic
t lab
our
was
the
only
mea
ns in
the
early
day
s of
pre
vent
ing
“the
G
arde
ns fr
om fa
lling
into
a s
tate
of d
ecay
”.37
(le
ads
to th
e R
oyal
Soc
iety
’s r
ole
in in
trod
ucin
g sp
ecia
list s
kills
an
d ex
pert
ise)
.
Tod
ay, R
TB
G s
taff
are
reco
gnis
ed fo
r br
ingi
ng a
hig
h le
vel o
f exp
ertis
e an
d sp
ecia
list k
now
ledg
e to
the
care
an
d de
velo
pmen
t of t
he G
arde
ns a
nd to
vita
l con
serv
atio
n w
ork.
The
Gar
dens
are
par
t of a
wid
er T
asm
ania
n co
nvic
t sto
ry th
at c
an b
e ex
perie
nced
at o
ther
site
s, in
clud
ing
Hob
art’s
Cas
cade
s F
emal
e F
acto
ry, P
ort A
rthu
r H
isto
ric S
ite, a
nd S
arah
Isla
nd.
Ena
bles
RT
BG
to ta
p in
to
exis
ting
stre
ngth
of t
ouris
t in
tere
st in
the
conv
ict s
tory
and
to
bui
ld o
n ex
perie
nces
vis
itors
ar
e lik
ely
to h
ave
had
else
whe
re.
Als
o is
a le
gitim
ate
way
to
show
case
, app
ropr
iate
ly, R
TB
G
as a
cen
tre
of e
xcel
lenc
e.
37 F
rom
The
mat
ic H
isto
ry p
repa
red
by h
isto
rian,
Lin
dy S
crip
ps, i
n 20
07 a
s pa
rt o
f RT
BG
Con
serv
atio
n M
anag
emen
t Pla
n.
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y T
HE
ME
S
UN
DE
RP
INN
ING
IDE
AS
R
AT
ION
ALE
S1
The
Roy
al T
asm
ania
n B
otan
ical
Gar
dens
sho
ws
you
how
to m
ake
a di
ffere
nce
whe
n it
com
es to
env
ironm
enta
l ch
ange
.
RT
BG
is a
n hi
stor
ical
rec
ord
of c
limat
e ch
ange
issu
es. P
lant
ada
ptat
ions
hav
e oc
curr
ed a
s a
resu
lt of
the
plan
et’s
his
toric
al c
limat
e ch
ange
.
Thr
ough
the
Gar
dens
, I c
an d
isco
ver
that
I ha
ve a
n im
port
ant p
art t
o pl
ay in
the
heal
th a
nd w
ellb
eing
of m
ysel
f, ot
hers
and
the
plan
et –
thr
ough
the
Gar
dens
’ was
te m
anag
emen
t/rec
yclin
g pr
actic
es to
the
com
post
hea
p in
P
ete’
s V
eggi
e P
atch
and
dire
ct le
arni
ng o
n-si
te.
The
env
ironm
ent i
s fr
agile
, ess
entia
l and
sus
cept
ible
and
ther
e ar
e th
ings
you
can
do
to w
ork
with
this
.
RT
BG
is a
cen
tre
for
findi
ng o
ut in
form
atio
n on
env
ironm
enta
l iss
ues.
It is
a p
lace
whe
re y
ou c
an le
arn
and
get
exci
ted
and
it is
an
acce
ssib
le s
ourc
e of
env
ironm
enta
l kno
wle
dge
e.g.
bei
ng w
ater
wis
e, le
arni
ng a
bout
wee
ds
and
whi
ch p
lant
s sh
ould
n’t b
e in
you
r ga
rden
, dis
cove
ring
orga
nic
gard
enin
g.
RT
BG
offe
rs fo
rmal
edu
catio
nal p
rogr
ams
and
info
rmal
lear
ning
.
Hig
hlig
hts
the
RT
BG
’s a
ctiv
e ro
le in
con
trib
utin
g to
qua
lity
of
life
for
loca
ls a
nd o
ther
s.
For
man
y lo
cals
, thi
s pl
ace
is
like
a m
embe
r of
the
fam
ily.
Man
y lo
cals
con
side
r th
e G
arde
ns a
s a
supp
ortiv
e ‘re
lativ
e’, c
omin
g he
re f
or c
omfo
rt in
har
d tim
es, t
o sl
ow
dow
n or
che
er u
p, to
enj
oy th
e se
nse
of s
afet
y, to
hav
e fu
n, o
r to
feel
a s
ense
of b
elon
ging
and
pla
ce (
e.g.
A
ntar
ctic
exp
editi
oner
s on
ret
urn)
.
The
Gar
dens
are
a r
epos
itory
of l
ocal
mem
orie
s. T
hey
are
a w
itnes
s to
the
begi
nnin
gs, e
ndin
gs a
nd th
e cy
cles
of
our
live
s –
visi
ting
as c
hild
ren,
cou
rtin
g, w
eddi
ngs,
sca
tterin
g th
e as
hes
of lo
ved
ones
.
Eve
n w
hen
they
don
’t vi
sit,
loca
ls f
eel g
ood
know
ing
that
the
Gar
dens
are
ther
e w
hen
they
wan
t or
need
to
expe
rienc
e th
em.
The
Gar
dens
are
an
impo
rtan
t par
t of l
ocal
iden
tity
and
the
imag
e of
Hob
art.
The
se a
re T
asm
ania
’s b
otan
ic g
arde
ns a
nd w
e ar
e pr
oud
of it
s hi
stor
y, it
s co
nditi
on a
nd th
e un
ique
Tas
man
ian
flora
with
in it
.
Per
sona
lises
the
sign
ifica
nce
of th
e G
arde
ns to
the
loca
l co
mm
unity
.
S3
The
Roy
al T
asm
ania
n B
otan
ical
Gar
dens
hav
e th
e po
wer
to in
spire
us
and
prov
ide
sanc
tuar
y in
our
bus
y liv
es.
The
Gar
dens
are
a u
niqu
ely
insp
iring
pla
ce fo
r re
invi
gora
tion
and
reco
nnec
tion
– ph
ysic
ally
, em
otio
nally
and
spi
ritua
lly. “
It gi
ves
us th
e ch
ance
to r
econ
nect
with
our
selv
es, o
ther
s an
d na
ture
.”
Thi
s is
a p
lace
that
nou
rishe
s ou
r im
agin
atio
n.
It is
a p
ower
ful p
lace
bec
ause
of i
ts s
enso
ry r
ichn
ess.
It is
a p
lace
of r
ecre
atio
n an
d re
laxa
tion,
with
opp
ortu
nitie
s fo
r in
divi
dual
and
gro
up
expr
essi
on/e
xper
ienc
es.
The
gar
dens
are
free
ly a
cces
sibl
e to
all.
Thi
s is
a p
lace
of l
ife! W
e ca
n lis
ten
to –
and
be
refu
eled
by
– th
e st
ory
that
nat
ure
tells
us
abou
t the
cy
cles
of l
ife.
Am
ong
all t
he d
estr
uctio
n an
d de
stru
ctiv
e pr
oces
ses
on th
e pl
anet
, the
RT
BG
sho
ws
us th
at
hum
ans
can
still
cre
ate
som
ethi
ng b
eaut
iful.
The
Gar
dens
sho
ws
that
eve
ryda
y ef
fort
(on
the
part
of
thos
e w
ho w
ork
here
and
are
pas
sion
ate
abou
t it)
can
cre
ate
extr
aord
inar
y ou
tcom
es.
The
Gar
dens
are
a r
ich
and
dyna
mic
env
ironm
ent t
hat i
s he
re fo
r ev
eryo
ne. W
e ca
n al
l sha
re in
the
owne
rshi
p of
them
and
can
be
part
of t
he G
arde
ns c
omm
unity
.
The
y re
min
d us
that
eve
ry d
ay a
bove
the
grou
nd is
a g
ood
day
– th
ey a
re a
pla
ce o
f unc
ompl
icat
ed
love
(so
meh
ow li
fe a
nd w
hat’s
impo
rtan
t all
seem
s si
mpl
er, h
ere)
.
In e
xplo
ring
the
them
ed G
arde
ns, w
e ar
e in
form
ed a
bout
our
ow
n id
entit
y an
d th
e di
ffere
nt id
entit
ies
of o
ther
cul
ture
s.
Info
rms
the
way
RT
BG
is
deve
lope
d ov
er ti
me.
S3
is
deliv
ered
larg
ely
thro
ugh
impl
icit
rath
er th
an o
vert
m
eans
e.g
. the
pro
visi
on o
f in
timat
e or
soc
ial s
pace
s;
oppo
rtun
ity/fa
cilit
ies
for
cont
empl
atio
n.
Als
o hi
ghlig
hts
the
impo
rtan
ce
of s
enso
ry e
lem
ents
in th
e in
terp
retiv
e pr
ogra
m.
A T T A C H E M E N T B T H E M A S T E R P L A N
In
spiri
ng P
lace
Env
ironm
enta
l Pla
nnin
g, L
ands
cape
Arc
hite
ctur
eTo
uris
m a
nd R
ecre
atio
n
Nor
th 1
:200
0@A
1
INSPIRING PLACE
S
ite M
aste
r P
lan
Roy
al T
asm
ania
n B
otan
ical
Gar
dens
M
ay 2
009
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
b
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
Fac
iliti
esN
ew v
isito
r hu
b an
d A
dmin
istr
atio
nN
ew a
nd e
xpan
ded
Tasm
ania
n F
ern
Hou
seS
ub-A
ntar
ctic
/Alp
ine
Cen
tre
Sup
erin
tend
ent’s
cot
tage
inte
rpre
tatio
n ar
eaTe
achi
ng a
nd L
earn
ing
Cen
tre
The
Frie
nd’s
Cot
tage
C
onse
rvat
ory
Arr
ival
, Par
kin
g a
nd
Pat
hs
Term
inat
e Lo
wer
Dom
ain
Roa
d. C
reat
e tu
rnin
g, a
rriv
al, d
rop-
off z
one
Bus
par
king
and
lay-
byS
tage
1 p
arki
ng u
sing
Low
er D
omai
n R
oad
alig
nmen
tP
edes
tria
n lin
k to
Sol
dier
’s M
emor
ial A
venu
e vi
a P
owde
r M
agaz
ine
Ped
estr
ian
prom
enad
e to
his
toric
ent
ry g
ate
Fea
ture
ped
estr
ian
brid
ge to
fore
shor
eF
utur
e pa
rkin
g N
ew 1
:20
retu
rn p
ath
from
nor
th o
f Gar
dens
Incl
inat
or li
nkin
g lo
wer
and
upp
er G
arde
nsN
ew p
edes
tria
n lin
k to
Cor
nelia
n B
ay W
alk
New
Fea
ture
Co
llect
ion
sB
eaum
aris
Zoo
– s
outh
ern
coni
fer
and
Gon
dwan
an s
peci
es
Tasm
ania
n gr
assl
ands
and
woo
dy g
rass
land
sTa
sman
ian
dry
scle
roph
yll f
ores
tTa
sman
ian
wet
scl
erop
hyll
fore
stTa
sman
ian
heat
hlan
d an
d co
asta
l spe
cies
Sal
tmar
shE
cono
mic
and
edu
catio
n ga
rden
sC
hild
ren’
s G
arde
n
Uti
lity
Are
asN
orth
ern
stor
age
area
Nur
sery
Eas
tern
sto
rage
are
a
1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
25)
a) b) c)
7
10
11
12
14
22
25
c
a10
Key
24