m5 east - beverly grove vegetation plan of management · 2016-01-13 · 8.6.2 pest control...

unit 18, level 3, 21 mary st surry hills nsw 2010 australia t (02) 8202 8333

www.nghenvironmental.com.au e [email protected]

po box 434 bathurst nsw 2795 australia

0488 820 748

suite 1, 216 carp st (po box 470) bega nsw 2550 australia

t 61 2 6492 8333

suite 1, 39 fitzmaurice st (po box 5464) wagga wagga nsw 2650 australia

t (02) 6971 9696

unit 17, 27 yallourn st (po box 1037) fyshwick act 2609 australia

t (02) 6280 5053

37 peron ave (po box 1037) dunsborough wa 6281 australia

(08) 9759 1985

BEVERLY GROVE VEGETATION PLAN

OF MANAGEMENT 2014

Roads and Maritime Services

JUNE 2014

unit 18, level 3, 21 mary st surry hills nsw 2010 australia t (02) 8202 8333

www.nghenvironmental.com.au e [email protected]

po box 434 bathurst nsw 2795 australia

0488 820 748

suite 1, 216 carp st (po box 470) bega nsw 2550 australia

t 61 2 6492 8333

suite 1, 39 fitzmaurice st (po box 5464) wagga wagga nsw 2650 australia

t (02) 6971 9696

unit 17, 27 yallourn st (po box 1037) fyshwick act 2609 australia

t (02) 6280 5053

37 peron ave (po box 1037) dunsborough wa 6281 australia

(08) 9759 1985

Document Verification

Project Title: Beverly Grove Vegetation Plan of Management

Project Number: 5535

Project File Name: Beverly Grove Vegetation Plan of Management Final Revision Date Prepared by (name) Reviewed by (name) Approved by (name)

Draft v1 28/04/14 Cameron Radford Jacqui Coughlan Natascha Arens

Draft Final

28/05/14 Cameron Radford Jacqui Coughlan Jenny Walsh

Final 23/06/14 Jacqui Coughlan Jacqui Coughlan

nghenvironmental prints all documents on environmentally sustainable paper including paper made from bagasse (a by-product of sugar production) or recycled paper.

nghenvironmental is a registered trading name of NGH Environmental Pty Ltd; ACN: 124 444 622. ABN: 31 124 444 622

Roads and Maritime Beverly Grove Vegetation Plan of Management

5535 Final 3

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ......................................................................................... 7

1.1 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................7

1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY .........................................................................................................7

2 OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN OF MANAGEMENT .......................................................................... 10

3 RELEVANT LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDELINES .................................................................. 10

3.1 NSW STATE LEGISLATION .................................................................................................................. 10

NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 ........................................................................................... 10

Noxious Weeds Act 1993 ................................................................................................................................ 10

State Environmental Planning Policy NO 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19) ........................................ 11

NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 ..................................................................................................... 12

Pesticides Act 1999 ......................................................................................................................................... 12

3.2 COMMONWEALTH LEGISLATION ...................................................................................................... 12

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.................................................................. 12

3.3 OTHER RELEVANT LEGISLATION FOR BUSHLAND RESERVE MANAGEMENT .................................... 13

3.4 VEGETATION COMMUNITY GUIDELINES ........................................................................................... 13

3.4.1 Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan ......................................................................................................... 13

3.4.2 Best Practice Guidelines – Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest and the Cox’s Creek Wetland and

Reserve Plan of Management ........................................................................................................ 14

4 LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................................. 17

4.1 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND FLORA SURVEY – M5 EAST MOTOR CORRIDOR BEVERLY HILLS –

GIBSON & MILLER, 1997 .............................................................................................................................. 17

4.2 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND PLAN OF MANAGEMENT – CUMBERLAND FLORA & FAUNA

INTERPRETIVE SERVICES 1998 ..................................................................................................................... 18

4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR M5 EAST 5 YEAR MAINTENANCE PLAN AT COOKS

RIVER/CASTLEREAGH IRONBARK FOREST (BEVERLY GROVE) 2008 – 2013 – NATIONAL TRUST OF

AUSTRALIA (NSW) 2007 ............................................................................................................................... 19

4.4 M5 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND MANAGEMENT REPORT SEPTEMBER 2006 – JUNE 2007 –

NATIONAL TRUST OF AUSTRALIA (NSW) 2007 ............................................................................................ 20

4.5 M5 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND MANAGEMENT REPORT DECEMBER 2009 – DECEMBER 2010 –






5 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ............................................................................................... 23


5535 Final 4

Roads and Maritime Services .......................................................................................................................... 23

National Trust Australia .................................................................................................................................. 24

City of Canterbury Council .............................................................................................................................. 24

Canterbury Golf Course .................................................................................................................................. 25

Cumberland Flora & Fauna Interpretive Services ........................................................................................... 25

Wolli Creek Preservation Society .................................................................................................................... 25

Other Local Landholders ................................................................................................................................. 26

6 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND SITE ASSESSMENT ....................................................................... 26

6.1 DATABASE SEARCHES ........................................................................................................................ 26

6.2 FIELD SURVEY .................................................................................................................................... 26

Vegetation ....................................................................................................................................................... 26

7 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................. 30

7.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................................. 30

General Vegetation Overview ......................................................................................................................... 30

Vegetation ....................................................................................................................................................... 30

Weeds………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..31

Threatened Species ......................................................................................................................................... 32

Fauna…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………33

Terrestrial Habitat ........................................................................................................................................... 33

Corridors and Connectivity ............................................................................................................................. 33

Hydrology…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..33

7.2 THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY ............................................................................................................... 33

7.2.1 Evident Threatening Processes ............................................................................................................ 33

7.2.2 Key Threatening Processes .................................................................................................................. 35

7.2.3 Potential Key Threatening Processes ................................................................................................... 37

8 UPDATED PLAN OF MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................... 38

8.1 CHANGES TO THE UPDATED PLAN OF MANAGEMENT ..................................................................... 38

8.2 PRIORITY THREAT AMELIORATION ACTIONS .................................................................................... 39

8.2.1 Weed Control ....................................................................................................................................... 39

8.2.2 Site Access ........................................................................................................................................... 40

8.2.3 Rubbish and Chemical Contaminant Removal ..................................................................................... 40

8.2.4 Storm Water, Sediment and Chemical Run-off Control....................................................................... 40

8.2.5 Implementation of Hygiene Protocols for Root-rot (Phytophthora cinnamomi) ................................ 40

8.2.6 Implementation of Hygiene Protocols for Myrtle Rust ....................................................................... 41


5535 Final 5

8.2.7 Feral and Pest Animal Control ............................................................................................................. 42

8.3 VEGETATION ASSESSMENT AND REGENERATION ............................................................................ 43

8.3.1 Source of Plants and Seed Collection .................................................................................................. 44

8.4 OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................ 44

8.4.1 Fire Management ................................................................................................................................ 44

8.4.2 Neighbouring landholder awareness and education ........................................................................... 45

8.5 ACTION MATRIX ................................................................................................................................ 46

8.6 MONITORING PLAN ........................................................................................................................... 50

8.6.1 Vegetation Monitoring ........................................................................................................................ 50

8.6.2 Pest Control Monitoring ...................................................................................................................... 50

8.6.3 Disease Monitoring .............................................................................................................................. 51

8.6.4 Drainage Monitoring............................................................................................................................ 51

8.6.5 Fire Regeneration Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 51

9 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. I

APPENDIX A PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED DURING VEGETATION SURVEYS .............................................. I

APPENDIX B INCEDENTAL FAUNA OBSERVATIONS .............................................................................. IV

APPENDIX C VEGETATION ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ...................................................................... V

APPENDIX D MYRTLE RUST TREATMENT ........................................................................................... VII

APPENDIX E NATIVE SEED COLLECTION RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. X

APPENDIX F REPRESENTATIVE COOKS RIVER CASTLEREAGH IRONBARK FOREST SPECIES FOR PLANTING

XIV

Figure 1-1. Beverly Grove Bushland with Beverly Grove Park to the south-east, Canterbury Golf Course to

the north-west and the M5 East Motorway to the south. ............................................................................. 8

Figure 4-1. Bush regeneration zones with primary, secondary and maintenance phase works between

2006 and 2007. Note white areas in Zones 1a, 1c and 2 are Primary weed growth zones (Source: National

Trust M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report, 2007)...................................................................20

Figure 4-2. Vegetative condition of zones in BGB in December 2011 (Source: National Trust of Australia

M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report December 2010 – December 2011). .............................22

Figure 4-3. Areas of Primary and Secondary weed control between December 201 and December 2012

(Source: National Trust of Australia M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report December 2011 –

December 2012). ..........................................................................................................................................23

Figure 6-1. Zones within BGB and locations for vegetation assessment quadrats and transects. ...............27


5535 Final 6

Figure 7-1. Example of Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest at Beverly Grove. Note the dominant

Melaleuca species. ........................................................................................................................................31

Figure 7-2. Example of Ehrharta erecta regrowth within BGB. ....................................................................31

Figure 7-3. Graffiti on vegetation within BGB. ..............................................................................................34

Figure 7-4. Fox den within Section 2 of BGB .................................................................................................37

Figure 8-1. Myrtle Rust on Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle). Source: Department of Industry and

Investment NSW (2010). ...............................................................................................................................41

Figure 8-2. 20 x 20 metre vegetation plot with 50 metre transect used for BioBanking Assessment

methodology. ................................................................................................................................................43


5535 Final 7

1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 BACKGROUND

nghenvironmental has been engaged by Roads and Maritime Services (Roads and Maritime) to review

and update the Plan of Management (PoM) for the Beverly Grove bushland (BGB) in Beverly Hills, Sydney.

This bushland is classified as remnant Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest (CRCIF) and is part of the

Cumberland Plain Woodlands. It is classified as an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC) under the

Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and is the only remaining remnant of this

endangered community within the Wolli Creek catchment. The existing PoM was written in 1998 by

Cumberland Flora and Fauna Interpretative Services to deal with the immediate threat of the M5 East

Motorway development. This PoM is now outdated and needs to be reviewed and updated to reflect

current circumstances. As well as regular maintenance work undertaken by Roads and Maritime, the

National Trust have been undertaking bush regeneration works on the site since 2008 and the BGB now

needs to be re-assessed with a new PoM prepared.

The existing PoM also required that a review and update of the PoM occur after 5 years.

1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

Located on the boundary of Hurstville and Canterbury Local Government Areas (LGAs), BGB is a two

hectare remnant of CRCIF which is listed as an EEC under the TSC Act. It is the only remaining remnant of

this endangered community within the Wolli Creek catchment.

The CRCIF remnant is bordered by Beverly Grove Park to the south-east, Canterbury Golf Course to the

north-west and the M5 East Motorway to the south (Figure 1-1). A public bicycle/foot path divides the

CRCIF patch into two sections. Each section has protective fencing around its borders, preventing access

by the general public, however, access can be gained by permission through padlocked gates at the

eastern end of each section.


5535 Final 8

Figure 1-1. Beverly Grove Bushland with Beverly Grove Park to the south-east, Canterbury Golf Course to the north-west and the M5 East Motorway to the south.


5535 Final 9

Roads and Maritime Conditions of Approval for the M5 East Motorway Development

The BGB is owned and managed by Roads and Maritime in response to The Conditions of Approval for the

M5 East Motorway development which stated:

Condition 86. The proposed Motorway route shall not pass through any areas of Cooks River Clay Plain Scrub Forest, at the site adjacent to Rosebank Avenue between Beverly Grove Park and Canterbury Golf Course, without the approval of the Director-General. Prior to seeking approval, the Proponent must prepare an assessment of the ecological values of the community and identify proposed mitigation measures. Consideration must also be given to other impacts in this area including impacts on open space and nearby dwellings. The assessment must be prepared in consultation with NPWS.

In response to these conditions, Roads and Maritime constructed a large retaining wall between the M5

East Motorway and the CRCIF remnant to minimise direct impacts to the CRCIF community such as

pollutants, noise and debris from motorway traffic.

Annual reports have been provided to Roads and Maritime documenting the implementation of the

Beverly Grove PoM (National Trust of Australia (NSW) Bushland Management Report: 2006-2007, 2009-

2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012).

1998 PoM

Further to the conditions under which construction of the M5 East Motorway was to proceed, Roads and

Maritime engaged Cumberland Flora & Fauna Interpretive Services (CFFIS) to prepare a PoM for the site

in 1998. This PoM largely addressed the immediate and post-construction issues due to the M5 East

Motorway development but also addressed issues such as regeneration of the CRCIF site, removal of

rubbish and elimination of destructive parkland management practices, stormwater management,

educational and scientific study, and administration funding, ongoing maintenance and community

education. Furthermore, within this PoM, it was recommended that a review take place followed by the

preparation of a new PoM at the end of a five year period. The original PoM is now outdated as the focus

of management on the site has changed.

National Trust

Roads and Maritime engaged the National Trust (NSW) to undergo bush regeneration work in the CRCIF

at the Beverly Grove site from December 2008 to December 2013. The Environmental Management Plan

prepared by the National Trust in 2008 aimed to reduce major weed infestations, reduce the extent of

environmental weeds that adversely affect the environmental values of the site, and improve the

resilience and area of threatened vegetation and fauna habitat through a bushland rehabilitation

program.

The National Trust produced a Bushland Management Report (December 2011 – 2012) which

summarised the progress of bushland work over this period and identified management issues with

recommendations for further site management.


5535 Final 10

2 OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

This (2014) PoM aims to:

- Review the previous literature on the management of BGB.

- Assess the current condition of the site including identification of management issues.

- Assess the current condition of the vegetation within the site.

- Liaise with current and potential stakeholders.

- Identify gaps and opportunities for improvement within the previous PoM.

- Prepare an updated PoM based on current conditions and practices.

3 RELEVANT LEGISLATION, POLICY AND

GUIDELINES

3.1 NSW STATE LEGISLATION

NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

There is one threatened vegetation community listed by the TSC Act that may be encountered whilst

carrying out vegetation works. This is the Cooks River Castlereagh Ironbark Forest. If works are likely to

impact on this community, Section 94 of the TSC Act contains seven factors that can be used to

determine whether the impact on the community will be significant or not. The same process is used to

determine the impact on a threatened species (e.g. Downy Wattle, which inhabits the Wolli Creek

Catchment Area in the Canterbury LGA).

Where a significant impact is likely to occur a species impact statement must be prepared for projects

assessed under Part 4 and Part 5 of the EP&A Act. The content of a species impact statement is outlined

in Sections 110 – 112 of the TSC Act and includes requesting Director-General’s requirements.

Noxious Weeds Act 1993

This act aims to prevent the establishment, reduce the risk of spread and minimise the extent of noxious

weeds. The Noxious Weeds Act 1993 (NW Act) guides the management of declared noxious weeds within

LGAs. The Act distinguishes between five classes of noxious weeds, which are separated based on their

distributions and the level of threat that each species poses to the environment, human health, or

primary production (Table 3-1). Noxious weeds that are classified as Class 1, 2 or 5 are also considered

‘notifiable weeds’, which simply means that the Local Control Authority (e.g. Council) must be informed

about the presence of the weed on land within 24 hours of becoming aware or suspecting that the weed

is on the land. Individual land holders and managers are required under the NW Act to control noxious

weeds declared for their area according to their classification. Declared noxious weeds in NSW are plants

that have been proclaimed under the NW Act. The legislation requires that these species be controlled or

eradicated.


5535 Final 11

In addition to the NW Act, an effort to gain control of weeds in Australia led to the development of a

National Weeds Strategy. The strategy was first developed in 1997 and further refined in 2007 by the

Commonwealth of Australia and issued under the authority of the National Resource Management

Ministerial Council. Detailed management procedures have been outlined under the strategy and

published for the control of 21 of the 32 recognised Weeds Of National Significance (WONS). WONS are

recognised as having potential to significantly impact upon natural values including: threats to human

health and safety; threats to pastoral and agricultural industries; threats to water quality and supply;

threats to indigenous flora; and threats to biodiversity and cultural values.

Table 3-1: Noxious weed classes and their characteristics as listed under the Noxious Weeds Act 1993.

Noxious Weed Class Class Characteristics

Class 1

State Prohibited Weeds

Plants that pose a potentially serious threat to primary production or the environment and are not present in the State or are present only to a limited extent.

Class 2

Regionally Prohibited Weeds

Plants that pose a potentially serious threat to primary production or the environment of a region to which the order applies and are not present in the region or are present only to a limited extent.

Class 3

Regionally Controlled Weeds

Plants that pose a serious threat to primary production or the environment of an area to which the order applies, are not widely distributed in the area and are likely to spread in the area or to another area.

Class 4

Locally Controlled Weeds

Plants that pose a threat to primary production, the environment or human health, are widely distributed in an area to which the order applies and are likely to spread in the area or to another area.

Class 5

Restricted Plants

Plants that are likely, by their sale or the sale of their seeds or movement within the State or an area of the State, to spread in the State or outside the State.

State Environmental Planning Policy NO 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19)

SEPP 19 aims to protect and preserve bushland within the Sydney Metropolitan area, and in other areas

of the State which nominate for inclusion under the terms of the Policy. For the purposes of SEPP 19,

urban bushland is defined as:

Land on which there is vegetation which is either a remainder of the natural vegetation of the land or, if

altered, is still representative of the structure and floristics of the natural vegetation.

Clause 6 (1) of the Policy states that "A person shall not disturb bushland zoned or reserved for public

open space purposes without the consent of Council" and further, Clause 7 (2) states that "a public

authority shall not disturb bushland for a purpose referred to in Clause 6 (2) unless it has first had regard

to the aims of the Policy". Further, Clause 9 requires that where development is to be carried out on land

which adjoins bushland protected by SEPP 19, the Consent Authority (usually Council) must consider the

need to retain any bushland on the land, and the impact of the proposed development on the adjacent,

protected bushland.

Beverly Grove Park is classified as community land, and the remnant bushland therein is afforded

protection under the terms of SEPP 19.


5535 Final 12

NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

This act aims to conserve nature, habitat, ecosystems, ecosystem processes and biological diversity at the

community, species and genetic levels. Under this Act all native fauna is protected, threatened or

otherwise. Schedule 13 of the act lists protected plants which shall not be harmed or picked on any land

either on or off National Park estate.

With regard to threatened species a person must not:

(a) harm any animal that is of, or is part of, a threatened species, an endangered population

or an endangered ecological community, or

(b) use any substance, animal, firearm, explosive, net, trap, hunting device or instrument or

means whatever for the purpose of harming any such animal.

Items of Aboriginal heritage (including objects and places) are protected and regulated under this Act.

Pesticides Act 1999

The Pesticides Act introduces new provisions to significantly improve the management of pesticides use

in NSW. It also aims to reduce the risks associated with the use of pesticides to human health, the

environment, property, industry and trade, and to promote collaborative and integrated policies for the

use of pesticides. Note that the generic term ‘pesticides’ includes bactericides, baits, fungicides,

herbicides, insecticides, lures, rodenticides and repellents (EPA 2000).

Of particular significance for bushland managers is the extension of responsibility for actions undertaken

by field operators. Section 111 provides that any person who causes or permits, by act or omission,

another person to commit an offence under this Act may also be guilty of that offence. The shared

liability (as identified) means that any occupier of land, person applying the pesticide (employee and/or

employer), contractor or company directors may be liable for any damage caused by the inappropriate

use of a pesticide.

3.2 COMMONWEALTH LEGISLATION

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

The Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) protects

nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places, which

are defined in the EPBC Act as matters of national environmental significance. Matters of national

environmental significance relevant to biodiversity are:

Wetlands of international importance.

Nationally threatened species and ecological communities.

Migratory species.

Significance of impacts is determined in accordance with the Significance impact guidelines 1.1 – matters

of national environmental significance (Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2006).

Where a proposal is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance,

the proposal is referred to the Federal Environment Minister. The referral process involves a decision on

whether or not the proposal is a ‘controlled action’. When a proposal is declared a controlled action,


5535 Final 13

approval from the Minister is required. Further information on the referral and approval process is

available at Assessment and approval process - EPBC Act

3.3 OTHER RELEVANT LEGISLATION FOR BUSHLAND RESERVE

MANAGEMENT

Other policies and Acts relevant to the management of remnant bushland in the urban environment

include:

- Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979;

- Heritage Act 1977;

- Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act);

- Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000;

- Poisons Act 1964;

- Public Health Act 1902; and

- State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs).

3.4 VEGETATION COMMUNITY GUIDELINES

3.4.1 Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan

The Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan was prepared by the then Department of the Environment, Climate

Change and Water DECCW (2011) for the long-term survival and protection of several state threatened

species, populations and ecological communities, including CRCIF. The recovery program states that

‘recovery efforts need to aim to ensure that a representative sample of all target threatened species,

populations and communities is conserved’, including remnant patches of CRCIF. The BGB has not been

identified as ‘Priority Conservation Land’, however, the plan states that this should not be misinterpreted

as underrating the significance of other remnant vegetation, such as that at Beverly Grove. In fact, areas

of local significance such as the CRCIF at Beverly Grove should complement and enhance these Priority

Conservation Lands.

The recovery plan also states that active management to best practice standards is needed to prevent the

degradation of remaining bushland remnants in such a fragmented landscape. Management relevant to

the BGB CRCIF would include the prevention of weed invasion, stormwater flooding and recreational

impacts such as illegal rubbish dumping. This will be complemented by increasing the extent and

condition of vegetation on the Cumberland Plain using assisted natural regeneration and revegetation

techniques.

Finally, the recovery plan lists actions for recovery grouped under a number of objectives. Those relevant

to the CRCIF at Beverly Grove include:

- To build a protected area network, compromising public and private lands, focused on the

priority conservation lands;

- To deliver best practice management for threatened species, populations and ecological

communities across the Cumberland Plain, with a specific focus on the priority

conservation lands and public lands where the primary management objectives are

compatible with conservation;

http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/assessments/process.html


5535 Final 14

- To develop an understanding and enhanced awareness in the community of the Cumberland Plain’s threatened biodiversity, the best practice standards for its management, and the recovery program; and

- To increase knowledge of the threats to the survival of the Cumberland Plain’s threatened

species, populations and ecological communities, and thereby improve capacity to manage

these in a strategic and effective manner.

3.4.2 Best Practice Guidelines – Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest and the Cox’s

Creek Wetland and Reserve Plan of Management

The Best Practice Guidelines – Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest and the Cox’s Creek Wetland and

Reserve Plan of Management use a demonstration site in Cox’s Creek Bushland Reserve to describe best

practice guidelines for CRCIF. The Cox’s Creek Wetland and Reserve Plan of Management prepared by

Strathfield Council deals directly with a CRCIF remnant.

Successful best practice methods implemented at the Cox’s Creek Bushland Reserve that are relevant to

Beverly Grove include:

Protecting the Cooks River Castlereagh Ironbark Forest Seedbank

Many species within the CRCIF can remain as seeds in the seed bank for decades. These seeds are the key

to regeneration. Appropriate use of fire and weed removal can initiate seed germination and

consequently vegetation regeneration. Other methods for instigating seed germination include using

‘smoke water’, soil disturbance and brush matting.

Regeneration is preferred over planting as it helps maintain the sites genetic integrity. If planting is

required, using seeds from the same or nearby remnants is ideal.

Weed Control and Restoration

Due to the Beverly Grove CRCIF occurring in moist, fertile soils, the likelihood of weeds establishing is

high. If weeds were allowed to dominate the site, the CRCIF species diversity and abundance would

decline over time. Best Practice Guidelines recommend a phased weed control program is essential for

regeneration and replanting of CRCIF. The phases are outlined below as they relate to the BGB.

Phase 1 Primary

Weeds are removed section by section from areas relatively free of weeds to areas of high weed

infestation. This method helps to minimise spread of weeds by reducing the weed source.

Phase 2 Consolidation

Allow the weeded area to recover for some months to minimise risk of erosion and allow re-sprouting. It

can be beneficial for weeds to re-sprout to offer protection to native seedlings from the elements.

However, it is important to remove weeds before seeds develop.

Phase 3 Maintenance

Weed invasion from surrounding areas can occur as a result of run-off, stormwater drains, wind dispersal,

human disturbance, and wildlife. Therefore, it is important to maintain a level of weed removal

maintenance.


5535 Final 15

Herbicide

Herbicide use should be restricted to the ‘cut and paint’ or ‘scrape and paint’ method in the Beverly

Grove CRCIF remnant to avoid killing non-target native species.

Buffer Zones and Adjoining Vegetation

Restoration and maintenance of a suitable buffer zone around a bushland remnant site can be beneficial

for minimising detrimental edge effects. However, this may not be possible at Beverly Grove where the

areas immediately outside the CRCIF remnant are disturbed and/or exotic and require regular land

maintenance such as mowing and edging. Therefore, cooperation between adjacent landholders for best

practice land management is crucial for on-site management. There is also potential for regeneration

activities inside Beverly Grove Park.

Planting in the Buffer Zone

A buffer zone directly adjacent to the CRCIF remnant is unlikely to be achieved due to the current

recreational park and golf course land use, however, the hillside exotic patch with some planted native

shrubs directly east of the CRCIF remnant may be a suitable area to regenerate or plant naturally

occurring CRCIF species.

Sediment Fencing

Where buffer zones or extra regeneration patches are zoned, sediment fences can be used to border the

patch and prevent adjacent perennial weeds such as grasses from entering the patch.

Soil Pathogens

The spread of Phytophthora cinnamomi is listed as a Key Threatening Process under the TSC Act and is

relevant to the Beverly Grove CRCIF remnant. This soil borne pathogen infects the root systems of plants

including those found in CRCIF. Infected soil can be spread by machinery, boots and tyres. Control

methods include:

- Sanitation of tools, machinery.

- Cleanliness of boots and tyres using detergent or disinfectant.

- Avoidance of woodchipping suspected infected vegetation.

Fire Management Practices

It is well known that many native plant species and communities benefit from and in many cases depend

on fire for regeneration and to maintain diversity and vigour.

Stockpile burns are an effective method of fire management for bushland remnants and involve

thinning/clearing senescent and weedy patches and burning the piled vegetation. It is important to have

different pile sizes to allow for varying heat intensities, creating a diverse range of soil responses in the

soil seedbank. It is also important to maintain a weed removal and vegetation monitoring program after

the burn.


5535 Final 16

Fauna Management

Some weeds can be beneficial to wildlife for refuge, foraging and refuge. Therefore, it is important to

maintain areas of ‘wildlife friendly’ weeds until native vegetation can regenerate and replace it.

Pest animals such as cats, foxes and rabbits should be controlled and monitored.

Stormwater and Run-off Control

Stormwater flowing into CRCIF remnants can spread weeds and contaminants after rain. Flows should be

diverted away from the remnant or methods for filtering weeds and contaminants used.

Monitoring and Maintenance

Monitoring is important because it:

Provides feedback on the effectiveness of management actions;

Allows for analysis of restoration and regeneration; and

Allows for comparison of management actions.

Monitoring methods can include:

Photo points;

Aerial photos;

Vegetation maps;

Flora and fauna species lists;

Quantitative data through permanent quadrats and/or transects;

Records of new techniques being trialed;

Reports detailing original condition and threats, management actions applied; and

outcomes from management.

Community awareness

The neighbouring residents, stakeholders involved and wider community should be engaged in the issues

for CRCIF conservation. Strategies for this can include:

Development of a comprehensive education and interpretive program;

Erection of educational signs indicating conservation significance of the CRCIF remnant;

Erection of information signs before and during restoration works;

Gathering of information on CRCIF and management actions on websites; and

Encouragement of volunteer groups for monitoring and rehabilitation works.


5535 Final 17

4 LITERATURE REVIEW

The following literature review is necessary to understand the previous impacts, management objectives,

management outcomes and on-going issues for the BGB site.

4.1 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND FLORA SURVEY – M5 EAST MOTOR

CORRIDOR BEVERLY HILLS – GIBSON & MILLER, 1997

This document was undertaken by Cumberland Flora and Fauna Interpretive Services under contract with

Roads and Maritime. It is the initial document assessing the significance of the M5 East Motorway

proposal on the endangered community of CRCIF.

The three structural units identified within the BGB were:

- Open Scrub (Melaleuca nodosa);

- Scrub (Melaleuca decora, M. nodosa, emergent Syncarpia glomulifera); and

- Channel Rushland (Schoenoplectus validus, Typha orientalis).

The report also found that:

- The core Clay Plain Scrub Forest was in good condition but weed effected along its

margins;

- Occasional firing of the scrub had served to protect the ground layer species diversity;

- Street drainage from Bykool Avenue is piped under the golf course and into the BGB

(section 1), contributing to weed dispersal;

- The paperbark is older in Locale 1 (Zone 1) than elsewhere in the site (30 – 40 years old),

however, is high in conservation value;

- The Melaleuca regrowth in Locale 2 (Zone 2) is recent (10 – 20 years) but comprises of the

core area of remnant Clay Plains Scrub Forest and is in good condition. The conservation

value of this area is high;

- Locale 3 (Zone 2) has older Melaleuca regrowth (20 – 30 years) and is more dense than

Locale 2 resulting in less ground-layer species diversity due to less light. Herbaceous

weeds are prevalent around the edges;

- Locales 4, 5 and 6 will all be affected by the M5 East Motorway proposal and are all of

moderate conservation value. Locale 4 (Zone 2) is heavily infested with weeds such as

Blackberry, Kikuyu and Couch;

- The areas in Locale 5 (Zone 4) not affected by the Motorway proposal are in better

condition than those that will be;

- The botanical integrity of Locale 6 (Zone 4) will not be lost due to the proposed Motorway.

- The areas that will be affected due to the Motorway proposal are already significantly

disturbed;

- Of significance to the site is the evidence of integration of the Clay Plain Scrub Forest with

Turpentine-Ironbark Forest (Locale 1, Zone 1); and

- The site has good foraging and refuge habitat for wildlife.

The report also identified potential impacts due to the Motorway proposal including:


5535 Final 18

- Damage to vegetation by machinery;

- Potential flooding issues in the BGB following the construction of the retaining wall; and

- Storage of materials adjacent to the BGB.

Finally, the report considered bushland rehabilitation for the site including:

- Funding;

- A Management Plan including a Bushland Rehabilitation Program;

- Access and the need for fencing;

- Weed eradication;

- Rubbish removal;

- Removal of deposited fill;

- Re-planting species including Eucalyptus longifolia, Acacia spp. and Melaleuca spp. Species

only occurring in the areas to be disturbed should also have a high priority for re-planting.

These species include Acacia falcate, Centaurium spicatum, Hydrocotlye peduncularis,

Indigofera australis and Melaleuca lineariifolia. All re-planted species should be from site-

indigenous material or nearby localities; and

- Re-establishing a wetland.

4.2 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND PLAN OF MANAGEMENT – CUMBERLAND

FLORA & FAUNA INTERPRETIVE SERVICES 1998

The Beverly Grove Bushland Pland of Management was the original PoM for the BGB prepared in 1998.

The PoM is summarised below:

- A two hectares remnant of Cooks River Clay Plain Scrub Forest is located in Beverly Grove

Park, a small recreation area in the Canterbury Municipality adjoining Canterbury Golf

Course at Beverly Hills.

- The bushland is fragmented by past clearing and impacted by urbanisation coupled with

parkland and golf course maintenance practices.

- The (then) proposed M5 East motorway corridor crosses through the bushland area and

posed a serious threat to the long-term survival of the Scrub Forest remnant. Cooks River

Clay Plain Scrub Forest was listed as an EEC in 1997 having incurred a 99% reduction of its

original habitat since European settlement.

- Due to recommendations made by Gibson & Miller (1997), alternative alignments for the

M5 East Motorway were selected to reduce impacts on the BGB.

- The key elements for this PoM are:

Bushland conservation.

Habitat Management for the Endangered Cooks River Clay Plain Scrub Forest.

Habitat Management for native fauna.

Catchment Management: upper Wolli Creek.

Use of the reserve for educational and scientific purposes.

Use of the reserve for passive recreation.

Administration and maintenance of the area.


5535 Final 19

- The BGB is recognised as having special considerations for protection and management

including:

Isolation from other Scrub Forest remnants.

Fragmentation.

Invasive weeds.

Destructive impacts from adjacent park maintenance.

Soil and rubbish dumping.

Motorway management impacts.

Flooding and drainage problems.

- These adverse impacts can be ameliorated by:

Instigating a bushland regeneration program.

Re-planting of intermarginal zones to reconnect fragmented scrub locales.

Rationalisation of boundaries to delineate between active and passive recreation

zones, as well as areas for conservation.

Erection of fences to control damage caused by dumping of rubbish and parkland

refuse.

Awareness of bushland friendly park maintenance practices by council, golf course

and parkland staff.

Rationalisation of walking and bike tracks to prevent trampling and compaction of

sensitive vegetation and soils.

Promotion of educational, heritage and conservation values of the site.

Promotion of community participation in the care and health of the site by way of

signage and literature.

4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR M5 EAST 5 YEAR

MAINTENANCE PLAN AT COOKS RIVER/CASTLEREAGH IRONBARK

FOREST (BEVERLY GROVE) 2008 – 2013 – NATIONAL TRUST OF

AUSTRALIA (NSW) 2007

The purpose of this document was to provide scientific information regarding the management of the

vegetation at BGB as agreed by Roads and Maritime and the National Trust.

The work aimed to maintain, protect and effectively manage the remnant native vegetation at BGB over

a five year period. The objectives being:

- Encourage natural regeneration;

- control and reduce weed seed sources;

- Create conditions that will encourage natural expansion of native vegetation;

- Continue to treat woody weeds;

- Secondary weeding; and

- Maintain healthy bushland areas.

This Environmental Management Plan (EMP) describes a bush regeneration strategy including an

integrated weed management approach including primary work, secondary work and maintenance. The

EMP also identifies potential impacts associated with the bush regeneration of the BGB. It does not


5535 Final 20

however, identify all the threats associated with the site that contribute to the disturbance and

degeneration of the BGB.

The document tabulates a list of safeguards that prevent the negative impacts associated with bush

regeneration from occurring.

Finally, the document recommends methods for monitoring the progress of the VMP.

4.4 M5 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND MANAGEMENT REPORT SEPTEMBER

2006 – JUNE 2007 – NATIONAL TRUST OF AUSTRALIA (NSW) 2007

This document is the first Bushland Management Report for the BGB after commencement of the

bushland works in 2003. It documents the final 250 hours of bush regeneration work (2006 – 2007)

within the original National Trust contract and also changes over the previous five years.

In general, grossly disturbed areas had primary weed removal and were then left to regenerate. Much of

the site was revegetated with native plants and hand removal of herbaceous plants occurred around

these revegetated sites. Spot spraying with glyphosate was also used to remove all other weeds growing

between plantings. All revegetation has occurred from plants grown from seed or cuttings collected on

site or nearby.

Fauna habitat was also improved and included planting native grasses for invertebrates, reptiles and

small birds and constructing rock piles for reptiles.

Some problems included:

- Not all primary weed growth in Zone 1a (Figure 4-1) could be removed.

- Not all herbaceous weed growth could be removed.

Figure 4-1. Bush regeneration zones with primary, secondary and maintenance phase works between 2006 and 2007. Note white areas in Zones 1a, 1c and 2 are Primary weed growth zones (Source: National Trust M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report, 2007).


5535 Final 21

4.5 M5 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND MANAGEMENT REPORT DECEMBER

2009 – DECEMBER 2010 – NATIONAL TRUST OF AUSTRALIA (NSW)

2010

This report documents the second year of the contract and 540 hours of bush regeneration work carried

out between 2009 and 2010.

This phase concentrated on further weed removal (especially primary in Zone 1), supplementary planting

and efforts to encourage revegetation. Primary weed removal included ‘scrape and paint’ of Ochna

serrulata’, Lantana, Privet and hand removal of Asparagus Fern. All exotic weeds were kept under control

in all areas despite there being high rainfall for this period. Spot spraying and hand weeding were used

for weed removal.

There was also evidence of native ground cover spreading over Zone 1a, 1b and 1d and regenerating

Acacias are spreading in Zone 1c (Figure 4-1).



2011

This report documents the third year of the contract and 540 hours of bush regeneration work carried


This phase continued with primary removal of weeds in Zone 1, and continued treatment of weeds in

other zones. No supplementary planting was carried out in this phase (Figure 4-2).

Some problems and solutions included:

- A tree from the adjoining golf club fell into the boundary fence of Zone 1b. The tree was

removed by the golf club.

- The ongoing issue of debris (mainly spray paint cans and aluminium drink cans) being left

by graffitists. The National Trust contacted Roads and Maritime for removal of this

rubbish.


5535 Final 22

Figure 4-2. Vegetative condition of zones in BGB in December 2011 (Source: National Trust of Australia M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report December 2010 – December 2011).



2012

This report documents the fourth year of the contract and 540 hours of bush regeneration work carried


This phase continued with primary removal of weeds in Zone 1, and continued treatment of weeds in

other zones. No supplementary planting was carried out in this phase. Native ground cover species

extended further over the BGB (Figure 4-3).

Some problems and solutions included:

- The identification of a fox and its den in Zone 2. A fox control program was recommended.

- The graffiti problem continued.


5535 Final 23

Figure 4-3. Areas of Primary and Secondary weed control between December 201 and December 2012 (Source: National Trust of Australia M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report December 2011 – December 2012).

5 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION This section outlines the stakeholder consultation undertaken during the review and update of the PoM.

All relevant stakeholders have been contacted and liaised with for involvement in the Beverly Grove

Bushland PoM. The cooperation of all stakeholders in management practices and a strategic approach

will ensure the BGB will continue to be managed effectively into the future.

Roads and Maritime Services

Roads and Maritime currently owns and manages the BGB. Roads and Maritime have engaged

nghenvironmental to review the original PoM to identify gaps in management and prepare an updated

PoM based on current site conditions.


5535 Final 24

National Trust Australia

In 2008, the National Trust were contracted by Roads and Maritime to prepare the EMP for

maintenance of the BGB to carry out the bush regeneration work over a five period. The work

undertaken by the National Trust included:

- Integrated weed control;

- Primary, secondary and maintenance bush regeneration;

- Disposal of weed material; and

- Revegetation

Pat Thomas has been the Project Manager for the BGB and has been contacted to discuss the EMP for the

BGB, the consequential Annual Bushland Management Reports and future management issues

approaches.

Pat explained that she was of aware of plans by Roads and Maritime to widen the existing M5 East

Motorway corridor but that these plans have not been solidified. Ongoing issues that Pat identified with

management of the site include:

- Weeds: Ehrharta erecta (Panic Veldtgrass) is an ongoing weed issue due to seeds entering

the site from the adjacent parklands and golf course. Also, annual weeds are an ongoing

issue. Seeds from these weeds enter the site through wind and water dispersal, therefore,

mesh silt fencing would be beneficial for weed prevention.

- Foxes: A fox den has been identified in the BGB and a fox has been sited on more than one

occasion, however, there was no evidence of fox presence or current usage of the den in

the site assessment.

- Graffiti: The graffiti artists entering the site leave rubbish (including the contaminant

graffiti cans), cut down newly generated or planted natives and spray vegetation with

graffiti.

- Fence repair: The fencing surrounding the BGB is in constant need of repair from damage

caused by trespassers.

Pat also explained that some areas of the BGB have regenerated or responded to new plantings well,

especially native ground cover.

City of Canterbury Council

Beverly Grove Park is situated in the Canterbury LGA, administered by City of Canterbury Council (CCC),

although ownership and management of the site is the responsibility of Roads and Maritime. CCC play an

important role in the regeneration and preservation of the Beverly Grove CRCIF remnant as they manage

the parklands and bicycle/walking tracks immediately adjacent to the site. Management practices in the

parklands can have direct impacts on the remnant bushland and the bicycle/walking track offers local

residents a chance to appreciate the bushland surroundings as it dissects the two sections of the CRCIF

remnant.

The Environment Manager at CCC (Nel Graham) has been contacted with regards to the BGB and

involvement from CCC. Nel explained that although they do not have access to the site, she has noticed


5535 Final 25

holes in fences and milk crates within the BGB as potential problems. Pat also identified the Marrickville

Community Nursery as a good source for native seed collection.

Canterbury Golf Course

The Canterbury Golf Course operates to the north and adjacent the CRCIF remnant. Like the surrounding

parklands, the management practices on this golf course can have direct impacts on the regeneration and

preservation of the BGB. Factors such as fertiliser and pesticide run-off, weed dispersal and rubbish can

all impact on the BGB. Management personnel at the gold course have been contacted including

Superintendent Adam O’Brien who is in charge of grounds maintenance. Adam explained that ‘Roundup’

was used annually on weeds within the golf course and the lawns and edges are cut regularly. Adam also

explained that all run-off from the golf course runs into stormwater drains under the golf course which

eventually connect to the causeway under the M5 East Motorway. He explained that these stormwater

drains do not run into the BGB.

Cumberland Flora & Fauna Interpretive Services

Cumberland Flora and Fauna Interpretive Services prepared the BGB PoM 1998. They are no longer in

operation.

Wolli Creek Preservation Society

This volunteer organisation aims to ‘ensure the preservation of the natural and cultural heritage of the

Wolli Creek Valley, its tributaries, associated corridors and their ecological communities, and the

ecologically sensitive restoration, expansion and maintenance of these areas.’ Currently, the society is

involved with 12 bushland restoration sites along the valley. The Wolli Creek Preservation Society is not

currently involved with bushland management of the Beverly Grove CRCIF remnant.

Peter Stevens, who is a Bushcare Co-ordinator for the Wolli Creek Preservation Society, has been

contacted and has recommended the following for the conservation of BGB:

- It is essential that this small patch of bushland be preserved as a remnant of a plant

community that was previously widespread in the area. - Physical protection by the exclusion of humans and animals needs to be maintained to

prevent degradation.

- Weeding/bush regeneration work needs to be maintained long-term because of the small

area involved. This needs to be on long-term contracts to ensure continuity of detailed

management.

- The area should be used, under strict conditions, as a seed source for locally uncommon

species that can be propagated (e.g. via the Marrickville Community Nursery) for planting

in the wider Cooks River catchment, including the Wolli Valley.

- The seed should also be used for further/replacement planting in the M5 Linear Park to

help provide connectivity and extension for bird and other species using the area's plant

community.

- The area would benefit from some judicious interpretive material to bring out its

significance. ‘Judicious' so as to avoid attracting intrusion or other destructive behaviour.


5535 Final 26

Other Local Landholders

Local schools such as St. Ursula’s College, Kingsgrove Public School, Kingsgrove High School, Regina Coeli

School, Beverly Hills Girls High School, Beverly Hills Public School, Narwee Public School, Beverly Hills

North Public School and McCallum’s Hill Public School could all get involved in community planting or

weeding days.

6 BEVERLY GROVE BUSHLAND SITE ASSESSMENT

6.1 DATABASE SEARCHES

Literature and databases relevant to this assessment were searched/reviewed with respect to the

Canterbury LGA, including:

NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) Wildlife Atlas Database (accessed March 2014).

Department of Environment (DoE) EPBC Act Protected Matters Search (accessed March 2014).

NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) Noxious Weed Database (accessed March 2014).

DoE EPBC Act Species Profiles and Threats Database (SPRAT) (accessed March 2014).

6.2 FIELD SURVEY

Vegetation

The aims of the vegetation surveys were to:

Determine the condition and extent of the vegetation within BGB.

Identify and clarify EECs within the study area and determine their condition and extent.

Identify whether threatened flora species are present within the study area, and whether it is

likely that any will occur within the existing habitat.

Two field surveys were undertaken in March 2014. Four vegetation assessment plots were undertaken

within the site. Approximately 6 person hours was spent inspecting the vegetation of the site, with

additional time taken to confirm species identifications and the condition and extent/boundaries of

vegetation communities. These vegetation plots have been marked and should be used for vegetation

condition monitoring in the future for comparison.

Zoning used by the National Trust of Australia was maintained in anticipation of renewal of the bush

regeneration contract for BGB between the National Trust of Australia and Roads and Maritime (Figure

6-1). Zoning was renamed for clarity.

A list of all flora species recorded during the surveys along with estimates of their relative abundance in

each identified vegetation community is provided in Appendix A.

.


5535 Final 27

Figure 6-1. Zones within BGB and locations for vegetation assessment quadrats and transects.


5535 Final 28

BioMetric Vegetation Plots

Four Biometric Vegetation Plots were established using the OEH BioBanking Assessment Methodology.

The locations of these plots were placed using a stratified approach to ensure that all native vegetation

types were adequately surveyed. In total there were four plots carried out within the site. These

vegetation plots were undertaken utilising the methodology presented in the relevant documents, such

as the BioBanking Assessment Methodology and Credit Calculator Operational Manual (OEH 2008).

Vegetation condition assessment

All vegetation communities in the study area were given a vegetation condition as per the OEH

Biobanking Assessment Methodology. Under the methodology, native woody vegetation is in low

condition if:

The over-storey per cent foliage is <25% of the lower value of the over-storey per cent foliage

cover benchmark for that vegetation type, AND

<50% of vegetation in the ground layer is indigenous species or >90% ploughed or fallow.

Native grassland or herbfield is in low condition if:

<50% of vegetation in the ground layer is indigenous species or >90% ploughed or fallow.

If native vegetation is not in low condition then it is considered to be in moderate to good condition.

Plant and community nomenclature

Vegetation communities in the BGB have been categorised on the basis of their structure and formation

using Specht (1970) classifications in combination with vegetation community lists published by Benson

and Howell (1994) and OEH (2013) that reflect the floristic composition and physiognomic features of the

site. OEH (2013) provides the most comprehensive and recent dataset of the vegetation within the

Sydney Metropolitan area including threatened community status and extents. Vegetation names have

been correlated with their relevant OEH BioMetric Vegetation Type, as per the OEH BioMetric Vegetation

Types Database.

Botanical nomenclature follows Harden (1990-2002), with recent name changes provided by the

Australian Plant Name Index of the Australian National Herbarium. In the body of this report, flora

species are referred to by both their common and scientific names when first mentioned. Subsequent

references to these species cite the common name only. Where a species does not have a generally

accepted common name, the scientific name is used throughout the body of the report. Common and

scientific names are included in the appendices.

Noxious weeds identified are those declared for the Canterbury LGA control area under the Noxious

Weeds Act 1993.

A full list of the flora species recorded from the study area during the surveys is presented in Error!

eference source not found. Field guides and standard texts used during the survey and for later

identification purposes are provided in the reference list. The naming of species recorded or known for

the region follows the Flora of NSW (Harden 1992-2002) with recent name changes provided by the

Australian Plant Name Index of the Australian National Herbarium.


5535 Final 29

Fauna

No formal fauna surveys were carried out during the fieldwork. Incidental observations of vertebrates

such as birds, reptiles, frogs and mammals were recorded at each site and have been included in Error!

eference source not found.


5535 Final 30

7 RESULTS

7.1 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

General Vegetation Overview

The BGB is a two hectare remnant of closed forest vegetation with a mid-canopy layer dominated by

Melaleuca (Melaleuca nodosa and Melaleuca decora) and Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca) and scattered

with trees of the family Myrtaceae (mainly Eucalyptus eugenoides and Syncarpia glomulifera) and

Fabaceae (Acacia parramattensis) (Figure 7-1). Historically, the vegetation has been disturbed by urban

impacts but has recently recovered largely due to regeneration efforts over the past 15 years.

Some areas have become senescent where mid-canopy trees are dominant (such as Melaleucas). This has

resulted in a loss of species diversity and vegetation structure (see Plan of Management below).

Vegetation

The BGB is comprised of CRCIF, an EEC under the TSC Act (Figure 6-1). This was matched to the following

BioMetric Vegetation Type and equivalent Vegetation Type identification number provided in

parentheses:

Broad-leaved Ironbark - Melaleuca decora shrubby open forest on clay soils of the Cumberland Plain,

Sydney Basin (ME002).

Representative canopy species for this community in the BGB include Red Mahogany (Eucalyptus

resinifera), Sydney Turpentine (Syncarpia glommulifera), Thin-leaved Stringybark (Eucalyptus

eugenioides) and Sydney Green Wattle (Acacia parramattensis). The mid-canopy species are dominant in

the BGB and include Prickly-leaved Paperbark (Melaleuca nodosa), White Feather Honey Myrtle

(Melaleuca decora) and Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca). Dominant shrub level species in the BGB include

Sydney Golden Wattle (Acacia longifolia), Native Blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa), Kangaroo Apple (Solanum

aviculare) and Elderberry Panax (Polyscias sambucifolia). The ground layer consists of a mixture of

grasses, forbs, climbers and rushes. Common native grasses include Right-angle Grass (Entolasia

marginata) and Barbed Wire Grass (Cymbopogon refractus), and common forbs included Kidney Weed

(Dichondra repens) and Native Wandering Jew (Commelina cyanea). Native climbers and twiners included

Wombat Berry (Eustrephus latifolius), Glycine (Gycine tabacina) and Slender Grape (Cayratia clematidea).

It is noted that Broad-leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus fibrosa) is absent at BGB. Even though this species is

usually a dominant canopy species in CRCIF, it can be absent as mentioned in OEH (2013).


5535 Final 31

Figure 7-1. Example of Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest at Beverly Grove. Note the dominant Melaleuca species.

Weeds

Although uncommon, weeds are still persistent in the BGB, especially herbs and grasses in edges and

disturbed areas such as pathways and drainage. Woody weeds identified included Mickey Mouse Plant

(Ochna serrulata), Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus) and Lantana (Lantana camara). Common weedy forbs

include Cobbler’s Pegs (Bidens pilosa), Fleabane (Conyza sp.), Wandering Jew (Tradescantia fluminensis),

Fireweed (Senecio madagascariensis) and Vetch (Vicia sp.). Common grass weeds include Panic Veldt

Grass (Ehrharta erecta) (Figure 7-2), Couch (Cynodon dactylon) and Kikuyu (Pennisetum clandestinum).

Panic Veldt Grass has been reported as being a persistent and common weed within the BGB (National

Trust 2007, 2011, 2012, and 2013). Abundance of this species was low within the BGB, indicating that

control has been relatively successful. However, due to the prevalence of this species in surrounding

parklands and the golf course, it will need to be monitored and managed continuously into the future.

Fleabane (Conyza sp.) was relatively abundant in edge and walkway areas. Blue Periwinkle (Vinca major)

was not identified in the current surveys although it has been reported as a major weed in previous

annual reports (National Trust 2007, 2011, 2012 and 2013).

Noxious weeds present included Lantana (Lantana camara), Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus) and Asparagus

Fern (Asparagus aethiopicus). All of these noxious weeds were in low abundance, however, continued

control and monitoring is required to suppress and finally remove these species from the BGB.

Figure 7-2. Example of Ehrharta erecta regrowth within BGB.


5535 Final 32

Plot Condition Scores

The four 20 x 20 metre plots with 50 metre transects were assessed for vegetation condition using the

BioMetric methodology. From these assessments condition scores were given to various components of

vegetation within the plots. These scores were then used to derive a Site Value Score which is score out

100 indicating the condition value of the plot vegetation area (Table 3-1) (Appendix C).

Table 7-1. Site Condition Scores (out of 100) for the four vegetation plots in BGB.

Plot Site Condition Score

1 49.6

2 59.7

3 47.1

4 36.4

The Site Condition Scores suggest that the BGB is roughly half way towards full recovery. The scores

indicate the vegetation is in moderate to good condition. However, these scores may be slightly

misleading because the Benchmark scores used are for 'Broad-leaved Ironbark - Grey Box - Melaleuca

decora grassy open forest on clay/gravel soils of the Cumberland Plain, Sydney Basin’ which is the closest

community to the Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest community used for this analysis. The CRCIF in

BGB is not a common form of the community as it is absent of Ironbarks and contains a more closed mid-

story cover dominated by Melaleucas and more shrubs and non-grass ground cover.

The areas that scored poorly in the assessment were native grass cover, native shrub cover, number of

hollow bearing trees and total length of fallen logs. The native shrub cover was far greater than the

benchmark cover, suggesting the benchmark community is more open in structure. The results suggest

the following:

- More native grass cover can be regenerated and planted; and

- The BGB is still in a young phase of regeneration where canopy species such as Eucalypts

are not yet dominating.

The results for exotic ground cover are encouraging, as is the species richness of each site, both of which

scored relatively well in the assessment. The native ground cover (other) was on the high end as well,

indicating grasses should replace these in areas of high ‘other’ ground cover. However, it is noted that

weed grasses such as Panic Veldt Grass are a common occurrence across the site which would be out-

competing native grasses.

Threatened Species

No threatened flora species were recorded within the BGB. The BGB provides habitat for Downy Wattle

(Acacia pubescens). This species occurs in Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest and has been

identified in the local area in the Wolli Creek valley to the east and to the west in areas close to the

existing M5 East Motorway. This species would be suitable for re-planting in the BGB and would increase

the conservation value of the site by the addition of threatened species.

No threatened fauna species were recorded. The BGB provides habitat for the Grey-headed Flying-fox

(Pteropus poliocephalus) and the Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis) which have

been identified in the local area. Melaleuca trees provide valuable foraging habitat for the Grey-headed

Flying-fox when in flower. Eastern Bentwing-bats use forested areas for hunting airborne invertebrate

prey.


5535 Final 33

Fauna

Opportunistic fauna sightings consisted mainly of birds and occasional herpetofauna. Birds included

generalists such as Pied Currawongs and small birds including Superb Fairywrens, Willy Wagtails and a

Rufous Fantail which is listed as migratory under the EPBC Act 1999. Reptiles observed included an

Eastern Bearded Dragon and Garden Skinks.

Terrestrial Habitat

The fauna habitat within the BGB is in moderate to good condition based on habitat assessment surveys.

Canopy trees provide foraging opportunities for birds and Grey-headed Flying-foxes. Mid-canopy trees

provide excellent foraging and nesting habitat for small to medium sized birds. The shrub layer is sparse

and offers limited foraging and nesting opportunities for small birds, small mammals and reptiles. The

ground cover is well represented in most of the zones and offers refuge, foraging nesting opportunities

for reptiles and small mammals. In areas where Melaleuca spp. are dominant and senescent, the ground

cover is often sparse as light is limited. Areas where the ground has been compacted due to regular foot

traffic are also fairly bare of ground cover.

Corridors and Connectivity

The BGB is largely isolated and fragmented. Efforts to regenerate areas between remnants have

succeeded, although the BGB is still fragmented in two sections due to the walking/cycling track dividing

the two sections. The BGB is loosely connected to canopy trees in the adjacent golf course, providing

some movement opportunities for birds. Similarly, there is some connection with shrub and canopy

vegetation along the edges of the motorway leading east towards the Wolli Creek valley, providing

further opportunities for bird movements. However, there is very limited connectivity for terrestrial

fauna which is evidenced by the lack of evidence of mammalian species within BGB.

Hydrology

The hydrological flows in and out of the BGB are complex. The BGB does not have existing stormwater

drainage that directs water out of the BGB and rain water generally seeps straight into the soil on-site or

flows overland out of the site. There is an outlet stormwater drain into Section 1 of the BGB that is

understood to originate from residential areas within the CCC. This outlet drain could be a source of

weed dispersal and weed species were observed in high abundance at this outlet. Other sources of water

inflow could come as run-off from the Canterbury Golf Course, however, it has been identified that outlet

drains within the golf course direct water underneath the golf course into stormwater drains which

eventually connect with a causeway underneath the M5 East Motorway.

7.2 THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY

An assessment of threatening processes helps to identify potential management issues which will need

management actions to rectify.

7.2.1 Evident Threatening Processes

A number of present threats have been identified as occurring, or potentially occurring, in BGB.


5535 Final 34

Site Access

The fence surrounding the BGB provides a deterrent to the public from entering the site. However, the

fence is climbable or can be cut, allowing human access and the associated rubbish dumping and

vandalism that occurs. Soil compaction and disturbance to vegetation also result from human access.

Furthermore, the foot traffic would be contributing to weed dispersal inside the site.

Physical Disturbance to Vegetation

Vegetation has been observed to be physically disturbed by people within the BGB. Vegetation has been

either cut, pulled out, sprayed or damaged. This is particularly frustrating and time consuming for

bushcare workers. Some vegetation has also been spray-painted (Figure 7-3) which lessens aesthetic

appeal.

Figure 7-3. Graffiti on vegetation within BGB.

Rubbish

The rubbish dumped by people into the BGB has a number of effects. The rubbish itself is mainly spray

cans and drink cans. These are non-biodegradable products and would remain in the BGB for extended

periods of time if not collected. Furthermore, the paint from the cans is a contaminant which can effect

soil chemical composition, in turn, creating a toxic environment for vegetation growth. Finally, the

presence of rubbish in the BGB lowers the visual appeal of the site for the public community.

Soil Compaction

Due to people entering the BGB, walkways cause soil to become compacted. This is particularly evident in

Zone 2a (Figure 6-1). This means that regeneration becomes difficult in these areas. Walkways also

encourage further foot traffic, compounding the issue.


5535 Final 35

Storm Water Run-off and Chemical Contamination

The outlet drain into Section 1 of BGB originates from the nearby Bykool Avenue. Therefore, all

stormwater from this street runs into the BGB. This stormwater may contain propagules and seeds of

weeds such as Panic Veldt Grass which is a serious weed in the BGB. Lawn clippings from park and

residential maintenance could easily end up in stormwater drains, as well as contaminants such as petrol

and oil from motor traffic.

The adjacent Canterbury Golf Course uses ‘Roundup’ annually to target weeds on the golf course,

however, it is questionable whether ‘Roundup’ is environmentally friendly and it may be contributing to

the death of native plants within the BGB when it runs off the golf course and into the site. Fertiliser is

also used in the golf course which can encourage weed growth when it enters the BGB through run-off.

Stochastic Events

Due to the small size of the BGB (approximately two hectares), it is vulnerable to stochastic events such

as wild fire or disease.

7.2.2 Key Threatening Processes

Key threatening processes under the TSC Act that have been identified as occurring on site are listed

below in order of descending importance. Key Threatening Processes that were not identified but may

have occurred in the past and may occur in the future are also listed.

Alteration to the natural flow regimes of rivers and streams and their floodplains and wetlands

(TSC Act 1995)

The natural floodplains and wetlands of Wolli Creek would have changed with the development of the

M5 East Motorway. The tributary running west from Wolli Creek is now effectively cut off from BGB and

is channelled through an existing causeway. Therefore, the BGB area probably does not receive as much

water as it once did. However, stormwater still flows into the BGB and it is unlikely that changes in

natural flow from Wolli Creek have affected the BGB significantly.

Bushrock removal (TSC Act 1995)

Bushrock has probably been removed from BGB over a long period of time since it has been exposed to

urban development. Therefore, the M5 East Motorway development would not have contributed to this

key threatening process and the exclusion fence is now protecting this valuable habitat resource within

BGB. Very few rocks were observed in the BGB for this updated PoM.

Competition and grazing by the feral European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) (TSC Act 1995),

Competition and land degradation by rabbits (EPBC Act 1999)

It is likely that rabbits have had an impact on the BGB in the past. Anecdotal evidence suggests that foxes

are using the BGB in which a den system has been located. These ‘dens’ were probably originally created

by rabbits and it is possible they are still used from time to time by rabbits with the extensive grazing

opportunities available on adjacent Canterbury Golf Course. Rabbits cause major disturbances to

regenerating and newly planted native vegetation by consuming seedling and saplings. They can also

cause major soil erosion from burrow digging. No evidence was observed during the current assessment

for this updated PoM and it is concluded that this species is currently not using the BGB. Anecdotal


5535 Final 36

evidence from the neighbouring CGC superintendent suggests that rabbits are not occurring in the

surrounding area either.

Invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara (TSC Act 1995)

Lantana has been observed in the BGB and is a major threat to existing natural vegetation. This species is

a fast coloniser and out-competes native species for space, causing major infestations. Lantana was

observed occasionally in the BGB during recent surveys for this updated PoM and is considered

uncommon.

Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses (TSC Act 1995)

Panic Veldt Grass (Ehrharta erecta) is a prolific weed in BGB needing constant removal. Seeds enter the

site via wind and water from the surrounding parklands and golf course. Maintenance practices like

mowing and edging cause the seed heads to be loosed, freeing the seeds for dispersal.

Loss and degradation of native plant and animal habitat by invasion of escaped garden plants,

including aquatic plants (TSC Act 1995) (EPBC Act 1999)

Escaped garden plants are an issue in urban environments as seeds or cuttings from urban gardens.

Weeds like Purple Top (Verbena sp.) and Spider Plant (Chlorophytum comosum) are species commonly

occurring in urban gardens and were both observed in the BGB in recent surveys for the current PoM,

although were considered uncommon.

Predation by the European red fox (Vulpes vulpes) (TSC Act 1995) (EPBC Act 1999)

As mentioned, the European Fox has been sited within the BGB and is possibly using the dens found

within BGB, although there was no evidence of this (Figure 7-4). Native fauna occurring within the Critical

Weight Range (35g – 500g) are most vulnerable to fox predation. An Eastern Bearded Dragon was

observed in the BGB and this species falls within this critical weight range. Full exclusion fencing of BGB

should exclude foxes if maintained well and bush regenerators on site can record any fox activity if

noticed.


5535 Final 37

Figure 7-4. Fox den within Section 2 of BGB

Removal of dead wood and dead trees (TSC Act 1995)

Dead wood and dead trees have probably been removed from BGB over a long period of time since it has

been exposed to urban development. Therefore, the M5 East Motorway development would not have

contributed to this key threatening process and the exclusion fence is now protecting this valuable

habitat resource within BGB.

7.2.3 Potential Key Threatening Processes

Key threatening processes that could potentially be occurring or that could occur in the future include:

Introduction and Establishment of Exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic on plants

of the family Myrtaceae (TSC Act 1995)

This is a newly introduced pathogen that infects Myrtaceae species. It is recognised as a serious threat to

production forests and natural ecosystems in Australia.

Infection of native plants by Phytophthora cinnamomi (TSC Act 1995), Dieback caused by root-rot

fungus (Phytophthora cinnamomi) (EPBC Act 1999)

This soil borne pathogen spreads into root systems and is widespread in coastal forests. It causes dieback

in species when infected.

Predation by the feral cats (Felis catus) (TSC Act 1995) (EPBC Act 1999)

Predation by feral cats is a major threat to native small mammals, reptiles and birds. Feral cats are likely

to enter the BGB from time to time. No evidence of cats were recorded in the BGB during the site


5535 Final 38

assessments for the updated PoM, however, anecdotal evidence from the CGC superintendent suggests

two large males are living in the local area.

8 UPDATED PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

8.1 CHANGES TO THE UPDATED PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

The previous PoM undertaken by CFFIS in 1998 largely focused on the management of the BGB during

and immediately following the construction of the M5 East Motorway. It addressed management issues

such as ‘Rationalisation of boundaries and access tracks’ and ‘Amelioration of motorway construction

impacts’, both of which have now been largely addressed.

This updated PoM focuses more on the continued maintenance, regeneration and threat management of

the BGB. The key changes from the previous PoM to the updated PoM are listed below:

- The methodology for surveying the vegetation community in the updated PoM is designed to be

repeatable for future monitoring of vegetation condition, species composition, species

regeneration and relative abundances of native and introduced species, as well as densities of

fauna habitat features such as logs and hollow bearing trees. This is essential for continual

adaptive management of the PoM. The updated PoM includes a consultation process with local

stakeholders aiming to seek further involvement of the management of the BGB.

- The continued regeneration of the site will incorporate more indigenous seed and plant

collection. The updated PoM will include a plan for this. Furthermore, a wider variety of plant

species traditionally endemic to the area will be investigated for planting.

- The updated PoM will also briefly investigate the fire history of the site and determine whether a

regulated fire regime is appropriate. This is driven largely by the current extent of senescent

monotypic vegetation such as strands of Melaleuca spp.

- The current fencing around the BGB is not adequate in preventing people incursions and hence

preventing rubbish dumping, soil compaction, weed dispersal through foot traffic and chemical

leakage from graffiti spray cans. This updated PoM will advise on actions that may prevent these

incursions.

- Run-off and weed dispersal from the park lands and Canterbury Golf Course are ongoing issues

that need more careful consideration and dedicated amelioration from the neighbouring

stakeholders involved. Furthermore, drainage into the BGB assists in the spread of weeds and

contaminants. This updated PoM includes advice on actions for ameliorating these threats.

- The previous PoM does not include actions for the management of feral and pest fauna species.

This updated PoM will address this, along with providing actions on improving habitat conditions

for native fauna.

- Although addressed in the previous PoM, this updated PoM may explore further opportunities for

High School and University research.

- This updated PoM includes up-to-date mapping.


5535 Final 39

8.2 PRIORITY THREAT AMELIORATION ACTIONS

8.2.1 Weed Control

The weed control program undertaken by the National Trust at the BGB has been largely successful.

Most primary work has been completed with most woody weeds such as Lantana, Blackberry, Privet and

Mickey Mouse Plant removed. However, new Lantana, Fireweed, Blackberry and Asparagus Fern saplings

were recorded in these surveys, indicating secondary follow-up weeding is required. Lantana, Blackberry,

Asparagus Fern and Fireweed are all weeds of national significance and have had control manuals

prepared for reference:

- Blackberry (NSW DPI, 2009).

- Lantana (QLD DPI, 2009).

- Fireweed (Sindel & Coleman, 2012).

- Asparagus Fern (OEHb, 2013).

The spread of Panic Veldt Grass (Ehrharta erecta) is an ongoing issue within the BGB. Seeds from this

grass are easily spread by wind and water from the surrounding parkland and golf course. It is for this

reason that a mesh silt fence is recommended to be attached to the existing exclusion fence around the

BGB. This silt fence will block seeds from entering the BGB and help to diminish the Panic Veldt Grass

seed bed within the BGB. However, secondary and maintenance phase weed control need still needs to

occur within the BGB. The current weed control program undertaken by the National Trust will be

sufficient for this. It is estimated that at least five more years of bushland management are required to

achieve a weed free BGB. After this, maintenance weeding will still need to be carried out from time to

time.

The priorities for ongoing weed control are:

- Follow up control of primary weed control areas (especially weeds of national significance

and noxious weeds).

- Continued maintenance control of all weeds using herbicides, cut and paste and manual

removal.

- Continued regeneration and re-vegetation of native plants to prevent weed

establishment.

Methods to be used for weed control include:

- Physical control (manual removal and brush-cutting). Used for most weed removal.

- Chemical control (herbicide application). Use only when physical removal is inappropriate.

Care should be taken not to affect non-target native species.

It is also recommended that Beverly Park and Canterbury Golf Course maintenance staff be educated on

the effects of mowing and seed dispersal. A strategic management plan is recommended to ensure grass

clippings are disposed of correctly, grass edges close to the BGB are clipped regularly to prevent seed

development and water run-off from parklands and the golf course does not run-off into the BGB.


5535 Final 40

8.2.2 Site Access

The issue with access into BGB by trespassers is on-going and may not have a viable solution. Regular

fence checks are recommended to check for holes and incursions. Barbed wire fencing skirting the top of

the existing fence may be an option, however, this will not be aesthetically pleasing.

Extra signage placed within the site indicating the significance of BGB may deter some people from

destructive actions. Furthermore, legislative signs indicating the legalities of trespassing on site may also

help to deter trespassers.

8.2.3 Rubbish and Chemical Contaminant Removal

Apart from improving site access control, some actions can be taken to counter the negative effects of

rubbish and chemical contamination inside the BGB. Regular rubbish removals should take place,

especially of spray cans. Bins could be installed inside the BGB near popular walking paths. Furthermore,

signage warning against green waste dumping should be erected.

8.2.4 Storm Water, Sediment and Chemical Run-off Control

It is recommended that the stormwater drain outlet into Section 1 of the BGB be extended so that

stormwater flows out of the BGB site. This water flow from the residential streets is a major contributor

to weed dispersal within the site. Weed infestation around this stormwater outlet drain was evident. A

filtering system inside the drain is alternative option to prevent outflow of seeds and contaminants such

as oil and petrol.

It is also recommended that Beverly Park and Canterbury Golf Course staff be made aware of the effects

grass seeds and contaminants can have on the condition of of BGB.

8.2.5 Implementation of Hygiene Protocols for Root-rot (Phytophthora cinnamomi)

There was no evidence of Phytopthora on site, however, it remains a constant threat due to the risk of it

being introduced from other areas, especially by bush regenerators. The following protocols should be

viewed as precautionary. Steps can be taken to ensure disease pathogens of Root-rot do not infect BGB.

Best practice management guidelines by Suddaby and Liew (2008) and O’Gara et al (2005) should be

implemented where possible. Soil testing would be required in order to confirm the presence of

Phytophthora.

Education

All staff working within the BGB should be aware and educated about the harmful pathogens that can be

introduced into the site. The most threatening being Root-rot and Myrtle Rust. This should include

knowledge of the pathogen, what it looks like, how it is spread and how it can be treated. Most

importantly, knowledge on methods for preventing introduction, limiting spread and reducing the impact

are crucial.

Assessment of Risk in BGB

- Define climatic risk: Warm conditions.

- Gather information and quantify risk: Susceptible species, plant health, soil types, water

movements, human activity, proximity of site to other infected areas.


5535 Final 41

- Soil sampling.

- Develop a reassessment and monitoring program.

Adjust Work Practices to Reflect Risk

Try to minimise activities that cause distribution of pathogens such as soil, water or plant movement

either inadvertently or deliberately.

Inform all Staff and Visitors to the Site

- Educate staff who most frequently visit the site to ensure they are aware of the risks and

implement safeguards whilst working on site.

- Information packages and brochures for people likely to be using the site often.

- Distribute the current PoM to bush regenerators working on the site.

Treat Infections

Eradication is difficult and has been largely unsuccessful in the past. Treat infected plants with fungicides

such as Phosphonate can boost plant defenses and increase resistance.

8.2.6 Implementation of Hygiene Protocols for Myrtle Rust

The following steps can be taken to ensure disease pathogens of Myrtle Rust do not infect BGB:

Evaluate Risks and Education

Prior to visits have all staff and visitors aware and educated on the risks and identification of Myrtle Rust

(Figure 8-1).

Figure 8-1. Myrtle Rust on Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle). Source: Department of Industry and Investment NSW (2010).

Treatment (O’Gara et al, 2005) (Suddaby and Liew, 2008)

- Affected plants should be treated with a suitable fungicide or removed.

- Fungicide treatment should be rotated between products to ensure active ingredients

remain effective. See Appendix D for a list of suitable fungicides for treatment.

- Remove infected plants or plant parts that are affected and store in plastic bags or under

black plastic. Spray surrounding plants and the infected plant three to four days before

removal to avoid spread of spores.


5535 Final 42

Prevent Spread (O’Gara et al, 2005) (Suddaby and Liew, 2008)

- Keep vehicles away from Myrtaceae plants.

- Workers should not enter the site having been on other bushland sites immediately prior

(i.e. enter site with clean clothes and boots).

- Wash clothing items and accessories including tools and boots in detergent where

possible. These should be sprayed with detergent before and after leaving the site.

- Clean footwear by removal of soil and mud, followed by applying detergent.

- Minimise number of equipment items brought to the BGB, clean between sites.

- Bag all plant material before taking off site and secure loads in vehicles.

Work Plans

- Design work plans to incorporate Myrtle Rust control.

Entering and Leaving BGB

- Set up wash down sites after entering.

- Always clean and disinfect when leaving a site.

After Leaving the Site

- If Myrtle Rust is observed on the site, ensure cars are washed and clothes are laundered

when leaving site.

- Dispose of rubbish responsibly.

Further Steps

- Do not remove plant material from site if possible.

8.2.7 Feral and Pest Animal Control

Evidence of rabbits, cats or foxes should be reported by the bush regeneration team when observed.

Following this, it is recommended that a nocturnal survey for cats, rabbits and foxes be undertaken to

determine if these species are using the BGB and in what abundance they are occurring. This should

involve spotlight transects, searches for signs including tracks and scats, and infra-red motion detection

cameras if available. These surveys should be carried out by a qualified ecologist or pest controller.

If evidence of cats or foxes is found, it is recommended that a pest control program be undertaken within

BGB by a qualified ecologist or pest controller. This program should include approximately five large cage

traps in both sections of the BGB to be left over a four night period. Traps should be placed near natural

runways but well hidden and chained to a tree to prevent theft. Bait options include tuna, sardines, soy

chicken wings and cat-nip (cats only). A pair of professional ecologists or pest control officers with the

relevant ethics and scientific licensing will be required to carry out the trapping program. An agreement

will need to be made between CCC, Roads and Maritime and the trapping team as to the process of

dealing with the trapped animal. For example, it is anticipated that some cats trapped will be owned by

the residential public and will need to be returned. Micro-chips can be scanned at a local vet. Foxes and

feral cats are to be ethically destroyed by law.

Fumigation of dens is not recommended as it may destroy the native wildlife using them for refuge.


5535 Final 43

A local residential education program on the threat of cats to native wildlife can be undertaken through

letter box brochure drops and education of cat owners. This is a responsibility for CCC and should only be

implemented if cats are observed in the BGB.

Regular monitoring for rabbits should be undertaken by bush regeneration staff. If evidence of rabbits is

observed then it should be recorded in bush regeneration reports and reported to Roads and Maritime. A

control program should then be undertaken by a qualified professional pest controller.

8.3 VEGETATION ASSESSMENT AND REGENERATION

It is recommended that the four plots used to assess vegetation condition within the BGB be used as

reference points for future vegetation monitoring so that the vegetation can be monitored for changes in

condition over time. Photo points should be set-up at the rear left of the 20 x 20 metre plot (Figure 8-2).

The methods used for assessment should follow the OEH BioBanking Assessment methodology.

Figure 8-2. 20 x 20 metre vegetation plot with 50 metre transect used for BioBanking Assessment methodology.

It is recommended that the National Trust Australia continue with the regeneration/revegetation works

in BGB. The National Trust Australia have been contracted as the bush regeneration company working in

the BGB for over ten years and have detailed knowledge of the success and failures of bush regeneration

works within the site over this time period. They have developed good techniques for weed removal and

control on the site, as well as expertise in regeneration and revegetation techniques. The outcome of the

bush regeneration works that the National Trust Australia have achieved for the site are encouraging,

having witnessed the BGB change from a weed infested remnant to an example of CRCIF in relatively

good condition.

Therefore, it is recommended that the National Trust Australia continue with the current bush

regeneration works they are undertaking and that an experienced ecologist be used for vegetation

condition assessments using the Biobanking Assessment methodology.

Most of the areas that were previously bare or heavily infested with weeds have been cleared of weeds

and allowed to regenerate. This is especially apparent for the areas around the edges and in between

remnants within the BGB. The walkway from the entry gate at Section 2 (Figure 6-1) extending along the

retaining wall adjacent to the motorway has only had planted shrubs regenerate, with a ground layer


5535 Final 44

almost completely absent. The ground layer is unlikely to regenerate until trespassers are properly

excluded from the site. Weeds are still present in these areas and in some areas are common. Therefore,

continued secondary and maintenance weed removal work needs to occur here. The priorities for weed

management are provided in Section 8.2.1.

The lack of Eucalyptus species on site presents an opportunity to re-plant more of these species. These

tube-stock plantings should be protected with barriers and species should consist of Thin-leaved

Stringybark (Eucalyptus eugenoides), Turpentine (Syncarpia glomulifera) and Woollybutt (E. longifolia).

Furthermore, due to the low scoring of native grass cover in the condition assessments (Results), it is

recommended that more grasses be planted. Grass species recommended include Wiry Panic (Entolasia

stricta), Threeawn Speargrass (Aristida vagans), Weeping Grass (Microleana stipoides var. stipoides) and

Kangaroo Grass (Themeda australis).

8.3.1 Source of Plants and Seed Collection

Tubestock plantings are recommended for use in revegetation which should be sourced from local

nurseries with local seed collections. These include:

- Marrickville Community Nursery.

- Strathfield Council Nursery.

- Greening Australia.

Strathfield Council Nursery has been involved with CRCIF regeneration projects in the past and specializes

in propagating species from this community.

It is also recommended that seeds be collected from BGB native plants to be propagated and planted

within BGB or similar locally occurring bushland. See Appendix E for recommendations on seed collection.

8.4 OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

8.4.1 Fire Management

Large areas of the BGB contain vegetation dominated by Melaleuca spp. (mainly in Zone 2b), resulting in

a vegetative monoculture with little species diversity. This vegetation structure pattern tends to occur

after previous clearing or a long absence of fire. Natural fires act to re-vitalise vegetation communities by

stimulating seed germination of many native species in the soil seed bank. Many of these native species

actually rely on fire for germination so without fire, species diversity can decrease over time.

Furthermore, open areas that fires create ensure seedlings can use optimal sunlight for growth.

Selective thinning with pile burns is recommended for the BGB in Zone 2b. This would involve areas with

abundant Melaleucas to be selective thinned and piled in gaps between vegetation. Weeds can be added

to this pile and under suitable conditions, the pile can be burnt. A number of these pile burns can be

created throughout the BGB, eventually creating a mosaic of differing age structures of vegetation. These

changes in age structure of the vegetation through the BGB would ensure high species diversity and a full

suite of fauna habitat structures. The steps for this program to succeed would include:

Consultation and Planning

A detailed selective thinning and burn program would need to be developed prior to the program

starting. Stakeholders including local fire brigades and NSW Rural Fire Service, arborists, ecological


5535 Final 45

consultants, conservation groups, councils, local residents and Roads and Maritime would need to be

consulted for planning.

Selection of suitable thinning/burning sites

These sites would be dominated by Melaleuca spp. with very little understory and preferably centralised

within the site for ease of control. Each site should be approximately 15 metres by 15 metres in size.

These areas should be without rare and threatened species. Vegetation surveys are necessary for

measuring species diversity and vegetation structure so that pre- and post-burn analysis can occur.

Permanent vegetation plots (10 metres x 10 metres) with metal pegs and tabs should be set up for

vegetation surveys.

Selective Thinning

A patch of Melaleuca is then thinned by cutting these trees at the base with a chainsaw. Approximately

half of these trees would need to be carried off site to be chipped. The remaining would be cut into

smaller lengths and piled in the middle of the thinned area. Weeds can be added to this pile. The burn

would take place sometime after the thinning to allow the vegetation to dry. A plastic covering can be

used to block sunlight and prevent weed re-growth.

Pile Burn

Favourable conditions are necessary for a safe and effective pile burn. Generally, these include:

- Dry ground cover.

- Minimal wind speed.

- Mild to warm temperatures.

- Fire Brigade availability.

The pile burn needs to be a combination of safe and environmentally effective. The burn needs to be hot

enough to stimulate seed germination, but not too hot that it becomes uncontrollable. The soil

temperature during the fire should exceed 60⁰C for effective seed germination, however, variable

temperatures are recommended for a range of vegetative responses.

Post-burn

Following the pile burn, the site needs to be monitored for weed removal and assessment of native

species germination. Vegetation plots should be set up under the OEH BioBanking Assessment

methodology and assessed every three months to measure the condition of the regeneration. Weed

removal will also need to take place in the set areas. Rabbit exclusion fencing is usually necessary,

however, this should not be needed with the exterior exclusion fence in place.

8.4.2 Neighbouring landholder awareness and education

A strategic PoM should include involving neighbouring land owners and appropriate stakeholders for

consultation and awareness. This process should include setting up meetings with the various

stakeholders to discuss issues and strategic actions relevant to BGB.


5535 Final 46

8.5 ACTION MATRIX

No: Action Priority Responsibility Cost Estimates

1 - Site Disturbance and Waste Management

1.1 Erect barbed wire fencing on top of exclusion fencing around the perimeter of the site to deter trespassing. High Roads and Maritime

Barbed Wire $10/m - 3 lines = $3000 Installation = $2000

1.2 Erect silt mesh fence to one metre high along inside of exclusion fence in both sections. This will prevent seed dispersal of neighbouring exotic grasses into BGB. High

Roads and Maritime

Silt mesh $1/m = $650 Installation = $500

1.3 Fence monitoring - check for need of fence repair and signs of incursions. Report to Roads and Maritime.

Medium Bush regenerators

Included in Bush regenerator contract

1.4

Fence repairs - Repair holes and damage to exclusion fence and silt mesh fence to prevent incursions, weed seeds and feral animals entering BGB.

High Roads and Maritime $20/repair

1.5 Erect legislative warning signs for trespassing.

Low Roads and Maritime

Signage = $50 Installation = $50

1.6

Trial installation of a rubbish bin in Section 2 of the site in the vicinity of the retaining wall where disused spray cans are left.

Medium Roads and Maritime

$64/bin + installation

1.7 Inspect and remove rubbish from the site every month.

High Roads and Maritime


2 - Disease and Pest Control

2.1 Pathogen/plant disease education, site risk assessment, prevention of pathogen entry and spread by following hygiene protocols. Medium

Bush regeneration management


2.2 Check for signs of Myrtle Rust or Root-rot outbreaks. Medium Bush regenerators Included in Bush regenerator


5535 Final 47


contract

3 - Native Plant Revegetation

3.1 Commission qualified bush regeneration team for continuation of bush regeneration works. High Roads and Maritime

Approximately $20K/year

3.2 Develop a new five year bush regeneration plan inclusive of weed management works. High Bush regenerators Approximately $20K/year

3.3 Acquire licences for native seed collection. High Bush regenerators $75/1-2 sites

3.4 Use locally sourced plants and seeds from BGB and local nurseries for bush revegetation where possible. Medium Bush regenerators Local nursery costs

3.4 Use Biobanking methodology for vegetation condition plot surveys to monitor condition of BGB vegetation. High

Bush regenerators/Ecologist


4 - Weed Management

4.1 Some primary, mainly secondary and maintenance weed removal. Target edge, drainage and primary removal areas as well as noxious and nationally significant weeds. High Bush regenerators


4.2

Ensure grass clippings are disposed of correctly and grass edges close to the BGB are clipped regularly to prevent exotic grass seeds developing and entering BGB via wind and water run-off from the golf course and parklands. High

Ground maintenance staff from CCG and Beverly Park

Included in regular wages

5 - Fire Vegetation Management

5.1 Acquire approvals for pile burns from local government. High Roads and Maritime NA

5.2 Initiate interest in research by approaching Universities for possible projects. Can use results to direct future vegetation fire management. Low

Roads and Maritime NA

5.3 Apply for research grants to fund the fire vegetation management. Low

Roads and Maritime, Universities NA


5535 Final 48


5.4 Use Biobanking methodology to mark out plots in pile burn areas for pre-burn vegetation surveys. Medium Researcher or Ecologist


5.5 Selective thinning of Melaleuca where pile burns will take place, pile weeds in these sites for burning. Medium Arborist or bush regenerators

Arborist approximately $100/hr

5.6 Burn piles of stacked Melaleuca and weeds in appropriate conditions. Medium Local or Rural Fire Brigade

Ecological burns are usually free on a waiting list

5.7 Monitor vegetation regeneration after burns by surveying the same vegetation plots using BioBanking methodology. Medium

Researcher or Ecologist


6 - Feral Animal Control

6.1 Monitor for signs of feral animal activity during site visits by bush regenerators (include scats, dens, burrows, tracks, predation of/by rabbits, cats and foxes). Medium Bush regenerators


6.2 Eradicate foxes, cats and rabbits on site after detection and enhance measures to exclude their entry on-site. Medium Pest controller Pest controller $100/hr

7 - Drainage Works

7.1 Change water outlet point of stormwater drain to outside of BGB by constructing new outlet drainage system away from BGB. High

Roads and Maritime, CCC

Approximately $5K

7.2 Inspect waterflow in and out of BGB to monitor for possible weed dispersal points. Medium Bush regenerators

Included in bush regenerator contract

8 - Stakeholder and neighbouring land owner liaison/engagement

8.1

Education and awareness about weed control, stormwater run-off issues, cat predation, rubbish and green waste disposal, BGB conservation to all stakeholders and neighbouring land owners. Achieved through letter box drops of information and brochures, signage, meetings with stakeholders and neighbouring land owners. High

Roads and Maritime

Meetings = free or consulting rate/hr

8.2 Liaison with National Trust, ecologists and local plant nurseries for vegetation management. High Roads and Maritime

Included in bush regenerator


5535 Final 49


contract

8.3 Consult contractors for erection of silt fence, barbed wire, bins, drainage works and signage. High Roads and Maritime


8.4 Liaise with bush regenerators on hygiene protocols for disease control. Medium Roads and Maritime


8.5 Liaise with Rural and Local Fire Brigade, researches, ecologist, arborist, bush regenerators for pile burns. Medium Roads and Maritime


8.6 If needed, consult with pest controller for feral animal control. Low Roads and Maritime


9 – Summary of Monitoring Actions Monitoring

Monitor condition of BGB vegetation condition using Biobanking methodology plot surveys. Refer to section 8.6.1

Fence monitoring - check for need of fence repair and signs of incursions. Report to Roads and Maritime.

Monitor for signs of feral animal activity during site visits by bush regenerators (include scats, dens, burrows, tracks, predation of/by rabbits, cats and foxes). Refer to section 8.6.2

Monitor for signs of Myrtle Rust or Root-rot outbreaks. Refer to section 8.6.3

Monitor vegetation regeneration after burns by surveying the same vegetation plots using BioBanking methodology. Refer to section 8.6.5

Inspect waterflow in and out of BGB to monitor for possible weed dispersal points. Refer to section 8.6.4


5535 Final 50

8.6 MONITORING PLAN

A monitoring plan is necessary for measuring the success of the actions undertaken in the PoM. Items to

be included in this monitoring plan include reporting requirements, vegetation condition assessments,

pest monitoring, photo point locations, aerial photos, flora and fauna species lists, records of new issues

and threats, and records of new management techniques. To effectively monitor these different aspects

of the BGB PoM, the monitoring program is to be separated into different components being:

- Vegetation monitoring.

- Pest control monitoring.

- Disease monitoring.

- Drainage monitoring.

- Site intrusion/rubbish dumping monitoring.

- Fire regeneration monitoring.

8.6.1 Vegetation Monitoring

The methods for monitoring vegetation condition have been described in Sections 6.2 and 8.3. These

methods will monitor all aspects of vegetation condition including native plant species richness, native

over-story cover, native mid-story cover, native ground cover (grasses), native ground cover (shrubs),

native ground cover (other), ground cover (exotic), and density of logs, trees with hollows and

regeneration percentage. These combined give a condition score out of 100 which can be used to

compare with previous assessments. It is important to monitor the same plots. These plots have been

selected as representatives of the BGB vegetation types. Monitoring should take place every six to

twelve months. The monitoring should be undertaken by an experienced ecologist or bush

regenerator.

The different vegetation components can also be compared to monitor changes in certain aspects of

vegetation condition. For example the exotic ground cover scores can be compared to measure weed

control and the native grass cover scores can be compared to compare native grass regeneration.

Walk through surveys should be carried out when bush regenerators are on-site to identify any changes

in vegetation including:

- Weed infestations (including identifying the source or cause of these where possible).

- Vegetation damage.

- Rate of growth and health of regenerated areas.

- Rate of growth and health of revegetated areas.

8.6.2 Pest Control Monitoring

The abundance of pests including rabbits, foxes and cats should be monitored. The presence of pest

species should be monitored by bush regenerators working on site. If feral animals are detected, then the

type of evidence, time, date and species should be recorded on bush regeneration work sheets. Following

this, pest control action should be implemented. This can be achieved using spotlight surveys, infra-red

cameras, track and scat surveys and trapping regimes. These should be undertaken by an experienced

ecologist or vertebrate pest controller.


5535 Final 51

8.6.3 Disease Monitoring

Monitoring for the presence of Myrtle Rust and Root-rot is very important to ensure good health and

vitality of the BGB. This will be mainly an on-site, ongoing assessment performed by bush regenerators.

Any signs of these pathogens should be recorded on bush regenerator field sheets and reported

immediately to the bush regenerator management, Rods and Maritime and the Exotic Plant Pest Hotline

on 1800 084 881 or email [email protected].

See Section 8.2 for identification, prevention and treatment of Myrtle Rust and Root-rot.

8.6.4 Drainage Monitoring

Following the drainage works which will divert stormwater drainage out of the BGB site, the area should

be monitored to determine whether these works have been effective. No stormwater drainage or run-off

from neighbouring land areas should be entering the BGB site. If so, this should be reported to Roads and

Maritime and rectifying actions should be applied.

8.6.5 Fire Regeneration Monitoring

Monitoring of vegetation growth following the pile burns is a very important phase of this procedure.

Weed removal will be required and areas of high native plant regeneration may need to be protected by

erecting rabbit exclusion fencing. Vegetation plots should be set up within these burn sites under the

same BioMetric methodology for monitoring of vegetation structure and species richness.

If pile burns take place, it is recommended that monitoring of the regenerating vegetation takes place

during regular vegetation plot assessments (every three months). These are to be undertaken by an

experienced ecologist or bush regenerator.

mailto:[email protected]


5535 Final I

9 REFERENCES

Benson, D. & Howell, J. (1994). The natural vegetation of the Sydney 1:100 000 map sheet. Cunninghamia Vol. 3(4): 677-787.

Brooker, M.I.H. & Kleinig, D.A. (2006). Field guide to Eucalypts vol. 1: south-eastern Australia. Bloomings Books Pty Ltd.

Cropper, S.C. (1993) Management of Endangered Plants. CSIRO, East Melbourne, Victoria.

DECCW, (2011). Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan. DECCW, Sydney.

Fairley, A. & Moore, P. (2010). Native plants of the Sydney Region, Revised 3rd Edition. Jacana Books, Crows Nest, NSW.

Gibson, C. P. & Miller, R. T. (1997). Beverly Grove Bushland Flora Survey M5 East Motorway Corridor Beverly Hills. Prepared for Roads and Traffic Authority. Cumberland Flora & Fauna Interpretive Services.

Gibson, C. P. & Miller, R. T. (1998). Beverly Grove Bushland Plan of Management. Prepared for Roads and Traffic Authority. Cumberland Flora & Fauna Interpretive Services.

Harden, G. (Ed). 1992-2002. Flora of New South Wales. Vols 1,2,3 and 4. NSW University Press, Kensington, NSW.

Keith, D. (2006) Ocean Shores to Desert Dunes: the native vegetation of New South Wales and the ACT. New South Wales Government, Department of Environment and Conservation.

National Trust of Australia (2007). M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report September 2006 – June 2007. Prepared for Roads and Traffic Authority. National Trust of Australia (NSW).

National Trust of Australia (2008). Environmental Management Plan for M5 East 5 Year Maintenance Plan at Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest (Beverly Grove Bushland) 2008-2013. Prepared for Roads and Traffic Authority. National Trust of Australia (NSW).

National Trust of Australia (2011). M5 Beverley Grove Bushland Management Report December 2009 – December 2010. Prepared for Roads and Traffic Authority. National Trust of Australia (NSW).

National Trust of Australia (2012). M5 Beverley Grove Bushland Management Report December 2010 – December 2011. Prepared for Roads and Traffic Authority. National Trust of Australia (NSW).

National Trust of Australia (2013). M5 Beverly Grove Bushland Management Report December 2011 – December 2012. Prepared for Roads and Maritime Services. National Trust of Australia (NSW).

NSW DPI (2009). Blackberry Control Manual – Management and control options for blackberry (Rubus spp.) in Australia. Victorian Department of Primary Industries, Melbourne.

OEH (2013a). The Native Vegetation of the Sydney Metropolitan Area. Volume 2: Vegetation Community Profiles. Version 2. OEH, Sydney.

OEH (2013b). Asparagus Weeds Management Manual – Current management and control options for asparagus weeds (Asparagus spp.) in Australia. OEH, Sydney.

OEH (2013c). The Native Vegetation of the Sydney Metropolitan Area – Volume 2: Vegetation Community Profiles, Version 2.0. OEH, Sydney.


5535 Final II

O’Gara, E., Howard, K., Wilson, B., and Hardy, G. (2005). Management of Phytopthora cinnamomi for Biodiversity Conservation in Australia: Part 1 – A Review of Current Management. A report funded by the Commonwealth Government DEH by the Centre of Phytopthora Science and Management, Murdoch University, Western Australia.

Pizzey, G.; Knight, F. (2012). The field guide to the birds of Australia 9th Ed (Editor S. Pizzey). HarperCollins Publishers (Australia) Pty Ltd.

QLD DPI (2009). Lantana – Best Practice Manual and Decision Support Tool. DPI, Queensland.

Richardson, F. J.; Richardson, R. G. & Shepherd, R. C. H. (2011). Weeds of the south-east: an identification guide for Australia 2nd Ed. R.G. and F.J. Richardson, Meredith, Victoria.

Sindel, B. & Coleman, M. (2012). Fireweed - A Best Practice Management Guide for Australian Landholders. University of New England, Armidale

Specht, R.L. (1970). Vegetation in the Australian environment. G.W. Leeper Ed., Fourth edition. CSIRO, Melbourne.

Strahler, A. N. (1952). Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topology. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 63 (11), 1117–1142.

Suddaby, T. & Liew, E. (2008). Best Practice Management Guidelines for Phytopthora cinnamomi within the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Authority Area. Botanic Gardens Trust, Sydney.

Tozer, M. (2003). The native vegetation of the Cumberland Plain, western Sydney: systematic classification and field identification of communities. Cunninghamia Vol. 8(1): 1-75.


5535 Final I

APPENDIX A PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED DURING

VEGETATION SURVEYS


5535 Final II


5535 Final III


5535 Final IV

APPENDIX B INCIDENTAL FAUNA OBSERVATIONS


5535 Final V

APPENDIX C VEGETATION ASSESSMENT

CALCULATIONS


5535 Final VI


5535 Final VII

APPENDIX D MYRTLE RUST TREATMENT


5535 Final VIII


5535 Final IX


5535 Final X

APPENDIX E NATIVE SEED COLLECTION

RECOMMENDATIONS


5535 Final XI


5535 Final XII


5535 Final XIII


5535 Final XIV

APPENDIX F REPRESENTATIVE COOKS RIVER

CASTLEREAGH IRONBARK FOREST SPECIES FOR

PLANTING

m5 east - beverly grove vegetation plan of management · 2016-01-13 · 8.6.2 pest control...

Documents