The aim of this project is to compile land use and management practices and their observed and measured impacts and effects on vegetation condition. The results provide land managers and researchers with a tool for reporting and monitoring spatial and temporal transformations of Australia’s native vegetated landscapes due to changes in land use and management practices. Following are the details about Wirilda-Callitris-Eucalyptus mallee in South Australia, Australia.
Pre-European reference-analogue vegetation: Callitris (Callitris preissii) - Eucalyptus mallee (E. odorata and E. porosa) low open woodland.
Brief chronology of changes in land use and management:
- 1750-1849: Meru indigenous people manage the area
- 1838: Explorers traversed the area
- 1850: Pastoralists with shepherds, grazing sheep
- 1883: Land selected, boundary fencing established
- 1883-1900: Continuous grazing with sheep and cattle grazing native vegetation
- 1890: Heavy timber cutting for Callington and Kanmantoo mines, sheep grazing
- 1900: Area ploughed and sown to black oats
- 1901-72: Continuous grazing with sheep and cattle grazing modified and native pastures
- 1950: Commenced fertilising pastures using super - applied aerially several times in the 1960’s
- 1972: Ceased applications of super fertilizer, ceased grazing all cattle removed
- 1974: Area purchased by the Lay family
- 1974-1981: Planted about 25,000 tubestock using local endemic species, mainly trees and shrubs
- 1974-2012: Monitoring and recording of seedling survival and regeneration
- 1974-1985, 2006-12: Major effort in controlling weeds and feral animals
- 1982: Area gazetted as a Heritage Agreement
- 1983-2003: All further revegetation efforts by direct seeding techniques such as “niche seeding”
- 1992: Massive summer rains (a 1:430 year event) with major erosion along watercourses and regeneration of most species
- 2004: Neighbour starts fire, which burns out 25% of area
- 2006: Area gains a 10 year package of funding under the “bushbids” biodiversity stewardship programme
- 2007: Monadenia weed orchid and bridal creeper begin to invade area.
Credit
We at TERN acknowledge the Traditional Owners and Custodians throughout Australia, New Zealand and all nations. We honour their profound connections to land, water, biodiversity and culture and pay our respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.
This work was funded by ACEAS, a facility of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN), an Australian Government National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) project.
Lineage
Information is compiled by year from published and unpublished sources. It includes qualitative and quantitative observations. It represents a structured narrative. Once compiled this narrative is translated into 22 indicators of vegetation condition which are grouped into three condition components: vegetation structure, species composition and regenerative capacity.
The pdf is a compilation of historical land use management of the site using 12 core attributes which describes the transformation of a native vegetation community relative to its reference state.
The spreadsheet provides the scores on the effects of the land management practices on the 22 indicators. Each indicator is scored from 0 to 1 for each year of the historical record; where 1 represents the reference state for each vegetation and environmental indicator, and 0 is where that vegetation indicator and/or ecological function is absent. The spreadsheet is used to sum and weight the indicators into the respective components of vegetation condition i.e. regenerative capacity, species composition and vegetation structure. The weighted transformation scores are then added to produce a single transformation index of vegetation condition for each year of the historical record. The results could be graphed and annotated to show the response of the plant community under different land use and management regimes.
Data Creation
Step 1. Select a representative site in terms of soil and landscape, and pre-European vegetation community.
Step 2: Locate that site using google earth and record its co-ordinates in the VAST-2 Chronology Datasheet
Step 3: Review relevant literature for the site and region, compiling information on land use history and associated land management practices. Simultaneously record for same year effect and impact of those practices on vegetation condition.
Step 4: Identify a group of specialists with ecological knowledge about the site who can revive, validate and identify gaps in the chronology and the accuracy of the data.
Step 5: Translate the observations from step 4 into 22 separately accessed vegetation condition indicators.
Step 6: Circulate the results of scoring of the 22 indicators and their aggregates including the graphs to the specialists identified in the step 4.
Step 7: Send results to Richard Thackway for incorporation into the ACEAS portal.
Authors
Point of Contact
Publisher