Native Vegetation Management in Queensland

Native Vegetation Management in Queensland
Background, Science and Values

Edited by: S. L. Boulter, B. A. Wilson, J. Westrup,
E. R. Anderson, E. J. Turner and J. C. Scanlan
DNRQ00116
ISBN 0 7345 1701 7
The State of Queensland, Department of Natural Resources, 2000
Department of Natural Resources
Locked Bag 40
Coorparoo DC, Qld 4151
Copies of this publication are available from:
Marketing Officer
Scientific Publishing
A Block, 80 Meiers Road
Indooroopilly Qld 4068, Australia
Phone: +61 7 3896 9515
Fax: +61 7 3896 9672
Email: <rsk.publications@dnr.qld.gov.au>
Website: <www.dnr.qld.gov.au>
Photographs courtesy of Jenny Milson, DPI

Front cover (left to right):
Acacia aneura (Mulga)
Ipomoea pes-caprae (Beach morning glory)
Back cover (top to bottom):
Brachychiton collinus (Hill kurrajong)
Clerodendrum floribundum (Lolly bush)
Acacia cambagei (Gidgee)
Nymphaea violacea (Water lily)
Astrebla squarrosa (Bull mitchell)
sp#14272
Foreword
Queenslands diverse array of landscapes and
vegetation is second to none. These unique assets
contribute to ecological processes critical for
sustaining life and the long-term productivity of our
primary industries. They provide space for
recreation, habitat for native animals, and the
natural beauty that helps define our State.
Demands on our States natural resources by both
our urban and rural communities are unlikely to
diminish as we move into the 21st century. We
have a collective responsibility to ensure that the
economic and social benefits we accrue from
development are not at the expense of the longterm quality of the environment.
Planning for the sustainable management of our
native vegetation requires a scientific understanding
of complex ecological processes. It also requires an
understanding of economic and social pressures of
an increasing population on our limited resources.
Our understanding of ecological processes is

evolving and Queensland already has a great wealth
of expertise, not the least of which comes from the
thousands of landholders who manage the land and
produce the food and fibre products that we depend
on. There is also a growing body of scientific
research into ecological processes. The role of this
literature review is to make the findings of this
research accessible to the many people who are
actively involved in vegetation management across
the State.
In the long term, our future will depend on how
we use and manage our natural resources. This
literature review highlights the importance of
scientific understanding in balancing ecologically
sustainable development with the protection of
biodiversity and other environmental and social
values to the future of Queenslands environment.
Rod Welford
Minister for Environment and Heritage and Minister
for Natural Resources
iii
Click on any topic to view it
Table of contents
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
Executive summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
1. Queenslands resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Queenslands land and vegetation resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Landscape health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.1 Rate of clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2.2 Current extent of regional ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Land tenure and legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1 Leasehold and freehold tenures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2 European settlement and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.3 Managing vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.4 Other legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3. National and international issues and their local impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.1 Ecologically sustainable development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2 Conservation of biological diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.3 Greenhouse effect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4. Regional and local processes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.1 Impacts of habitat loss on biodiversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.1.1 How much habitat is required for conservation of biodiversity at a regional level? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.1.2 Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.1.3 Condition of vegetation remnants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.1.4 Impacts of domestic grazing within remnant vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.1.5 Ecosystem repair and management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.1.6 Vegetation with particular ecological and catchment values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.1.6.1 Riparian zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.1.6.2 Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.1.6.3 Marine and adjacent coastal vegetation communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.2 Land degradation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.2.1 Tree decline and dieback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.2.2 Pest invasions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.2.3 Tree removal: implications for soil processes and accelerated soil loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4.2.4 Soil structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
4.2.5 Nutrient cycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
4.2.6 Soil acidification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
4.2.7 Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.2.8 Salinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4.3 Management and production aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
4.3.1 Crop production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
4.3.2 Animal production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.3.3 Pasture production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
4.3.4 Improved pastures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
4.3.5 Regrowth management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
4.3.6 Fire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
4.3.7 Timber production and farm forestry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4.3.8 Alternative products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
4.4 Other values of native vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
4.4.1 Non-value benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
4.4.2 Urban and peri-urban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
iv
5. Social and economic issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

5.1 Rural social issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
5.1.1 Socioeconomic issues related to native vegetation management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
5.1.2 Social issues and sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
5.1.3 Community involvement issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
5.1.4 Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5.2 An economic analysis of broadscale tree clearing in Queensland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5.2.1 Introduction.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5.2.2 Marginal costs and benefits of clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.2.3 Assessing the costs and benefits of clearing options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.2.4 Net on-farm benefits from tree clearing in Queensland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
5.2.5 Indirect external impacts from tree clearing.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
5.2.6 The non-use values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
5.2.7 Measures to reduce tree-clearing activities.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6. Planning and monitoring native vegetation management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.1 Vegetation management planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.1.1 Planning defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.1.2 Regional approaches to planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
6.1.3 Planning for vegetation management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
6.1.4 Property planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.1.5 Configuration of remnant vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.1.6 How do the different layers of planning relate? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.2 Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Appendix 1 Overview of the bioregions of Queensland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Appendix 2 Description of land types (native pasture communities). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
Appendix 3 Queensland Herbarium vegetation and regional ecosystem survey and mapping program . . . . . . . 132
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Preface
Acknowledgments
This review is an update of a report to the Working

Group of the Ministerial Consultative Committee on
Tree Clearing: The Production, Economic and
Environmental Impacts of Tree Clearing in Queensland:
a Report to the Working Group of the Ministerial
Consultative Committee on Tree Clearing, J. C. Scanlan
and E. J. Turner (eds), 1995.
Principal editor
The original report represented the findings of a

Scientific Forum that examined the impact tree
clearing on leasehold land had, or is likely to have
had, on production, economics and the
environment. This was conducted having due
regard to the Governments stated objectives on
tree clearing and the Draft State Guidelines on
Broadscale Tree Clearing.
In describing the purpose of the original report, the
editors noted the following limitations:
While an attempt has been made to provide a
comprehensive review, not all issues have been
covered in equal depth. A majority of the research
reported here has an agricultural production focus.
This is a reflection of the amount of research
conducted and available, rather than any bias in the
compilation of this report. Some of the issues not
covered in detail include induced salinisation,
eucalypt dieback, soil acidification, weed introduction
and spread, soil biology, and general consideration of
local and regional ecosystem processes.
In August 1999, the State Liaison and Coordination

Group on Native Vegetation Management,
representatives from Department of Primary
Industries, the Environmental Protection Agency
and Department of Natural Resources agreed on
the need to update this review. This update is a
collation of review material submitted by staff from
these three departments plus others from Central
Queensland University, Griffith University, CSIRO
and Brisbane City Council.
The purpose of this revised publication was to
update and collate current scientific information
relevant to all aspects of tree clearing and
sustainable native vegetation management. It is
primarily intended to provide professional technical
support material for staff dealing with tree-clearing
issues and a comprehensive assessment of the
environmental, economic and production
information relating to the impacts of tree clearing.
vi
This version aims to broadly cover the relevant

research and diverse debate to provide information
that can be used to assess how vegetation should be
managed. The majority of the recent research
focuses strongly on issues of sustainable production,
biodiversity conservation and environmental health,
and this is reflected in the overall content of this
review. In this update, we have included information
on issues identified in the original report as having
been considered in less detail. These include salinity,
dieback, weeds and accelerated greenhouse effect.
Sarah Boulter
Editorial
Bruce Wilson
Jude Westrup
Eric Anderson
Ed Turner
Joe Scanlan
Environmental Protection Agency

Department of Primary Industries
Contributors
Numerous experts from various fields contributed
to preparing the main text of the sections. Their
names are listed at the beginning of each section.
The original report, The Production, Economic and
Environmental Impacts of Tree Clearing in Queensland:
a Report to the Working Group of the Ministerial
Consultative Committee on Tree Clearing, J. C. Scanlan
and E. J. Turner (eds), 1995, was prepared by a
scientific forum with the following membership:
Department of Lands
Joe Scanlan
Ed Turner
Pat Lyons
Elton Miller
Jim Walls
Geoff Edwards
Department of Environment and Heritage
Des Boyland
Bruce Wilson
Peter Stanton
Gethin Morgan
Stephen Barry
Keith Claymore
Bill Burrows
Eric Anderson
Bob Miles
Bob Shepherd
George Bourne
Blair Bartholomew
Tony Constantini
A large number of people provided comment and
review of earlier drafts of this review. Special
thanks must go to Joe Scanlan and Kay Dorricott
for coordinating contributions for two sections. In
particular, comprehensive comments were provided
on the entire document by Ed Turner, Bill Burrows,
Eric Anderson, Joe Scanlan, Jude Westrup, Melva
Hobson, Andrea Leverington, and Paul Hauenschild.
Others provided significant comment on areas of
interest: Bruce Wilson, Adrian Jeffreys, Blair
Bartholomew, Brian Vandersee, Chris Hill, Don
Begbie, Grant Wardell-Johnson, John Ludwig, Ross
Wilson, Mick Capelin, Nev Hunt, Paul Lawrence,
Rachel McFadyen, Rod Hewitt, Ross Berndt, Mardi
Schmidt, Wojciech Poplawski, Ian Gordon, Bruce
Cook, Geoffrey Lawrence, Adam Geitzelt, Clive
McAlpin, Alan Dale, Tara Martin, and Jennifer
Finlay. Bronwen Fletcher and Kirsten Kenyon
assisted with the final editing and compilation.
Bronwen Fletcher assisted with preparation of the
section summaries.
Executive summary
This review looks at a wide range of physical,
ecological, social and economic issues that relate to
native vegetation and, in particular, tree clearing, in
Queensland. While the review necessarily has a
scientific focus, the intent is to provide a greater
understanding of the need for sound policies and
administrative procedures involving the production
biodiversity nexus in attaining sustainable natural
resource use and management. The review has
tried to look at vegetation management as one part
of sustaining the landscape.
The responsibility for managing freehold and
leasehold lands rests largely with individuals, but
with government setting the policy and regulatory
framework that will stimulate change towards the
sustainable use of natural resources. Part of the
sustainability question is ensuring economic
viability for both individuals and the State in the
long term. The continuing challenge is to achieve
lasting changes in attitudes to the sustainable use
and management of natural resources, particularly
in regard to native vegetation management.
Sustainability is the primary goal of land managers,
government agencies and the global community.
The precise meaning of sustainability is debatable,
and generally reflects the values of the user.
Sustainability may be economic, social and
ecological, and consideration of vegetation
management will require finding a balance between
these considerations.
Decision making about management options needs
to be put into both the social and economic
context. This review, while focusing primarily on
the physical context, also considers these issues.
To meet the requirements of sustainability, and the
consideration of economic and social issues in
managing native vegetation, planning and
monitoring are essential tools. Queensland has
substantial bioregion mapping and information that
can serve as a basis to regional vegetation
management planning. The regional planning
process could become an integral and connecting
component of a whole planning system, and offer a
participative, adaptive and equitable planning
process.
Approximately 68% of Queensland is under
leasehold tenure, and regulated by the Land Act 1994
(Qld). Of the remaining land, 24% is freehold tenure.
The historical development of agricultural and
pastoral lands, and the accompanying development
of statutory controls of land clearing are discussed.
At the national, State and local level, there are a
number of legislative and policy documents that deal
with native vegetation management.
Thirteen bioregions have been described for

Queensland. There is evidence of declining
landscape health in all areas of the State. Land
degradation includes soil fertility and structure
decline, salinity, erosion and loss of habitat.
A number of pressures on the condition of lands
include climatic conditions, population growth,
economic pressures, urbanisation, vegetation
clearance, agriculture, forestry operations and
mining.
Tree clearing can have direct and indirect impacts
on landscape and ecosystem health. Impacts or
changes may be desirable or undesirable, and this
can depend on the value placed on vegetation.
Managing native vegetation requires consideration
of many interrelated and complex factors.
Some impacts on landscape and ecosystem health
attributable to tree clearing:
Vegetation clearing causes habitat fragmentation
and loss. Loss of habitat leads to decreases in
abundance of individual species, changes to
community dynamics and a decline in ecosystem
functioning. A loss of essential ecosystem
services can include disruption of nutrient
cycling, atmospheric cycling, water quality,
genetic diversity, production inputs, soil
formation and fertility, pollination, natural pest
control and bioremediation. This can affect both
production and environmental values.
Information on the predicted and actual
relationship between species loss and habitat
retention is presented. This indicates that there
are habitat retention thresholds below which the
rate of species loss may dramatically increase.
Clearing of vegetation also results in the loss of
other values such as scenic and intrinsic values.
Quantifying and assessing these values,
especially in economic terms, is just beginning
for Queensland.
Tree clearing has a direct impact on the
hydrological regime. Generally the removal of
deep-rooted trees increases deep drainage and
this may result in the expression of salinity at or
near the soil surface. Areas likely to be impacted
are largely restricted to areas with between
600 and 1500 mm annual rainfall. Assessment of
salinity hazard risk can ensure clearing will not
result in salinity.
There is considerable evidence from much of
Queensland that removal of large woody
vegetation can increase pasture growth as
competition for water and nutrients is removed.
This response has been the main incentive for
the development of Queenslands rural
industries. There are some studies that have
demonstrated the improvement of pasture
growth with retained trees.
vii
Clearing of trees releases carbon stored as

biomass in standing vegetation and this
contributes to greenhouse gas emissions.
Australia has international obligations to ensure
growth in emissions remains below 108% of
1990-95 levels.
There are other impacts for which the evidence of
the direct effects of tree clearing is conflicting:
Well-pastured blocks have been demonstrated to
be efficient in minimising run-off, although there
are other studies that demonstrate an increase in
run-off following the clearing of treesmaking it
difficult to generalise about the impacts of tree
cover on soil surface erosion. In riparian areas,
trees have been shown to protect streambanks
from mass failure and erosion by adding to bed
and bank stability.
There are other changes in ecosystem health that
result from post-clearing management, rather than
clearing per se:
Erosion of soil is controlled by a number of
factors, including slope, ground cover and
infiltration rate. These factors are affected by
management practices such as grazing pressures
and the use of fire. Fire has historically played
a role in vegetation dynamics. There is some
evidence that Indigenous fire management
affected plant demographics and structure,
although the extent of this is still debated in
the literature. Fire is still used as a management
tool today.
Soil compaction is more likely to occur under
heavy grazing, particularly where the soil is wet
or poorly structured naturally.
Some land uses are particularly acidifying to soil.
They include those cropping activities that
include the removal of large quantities of
harvested material, application of ammoniabased fertilisers and introduction of legumes.
Particular soil types are more vulnerable to
acidification than others.
Changes in vegetation structure and composition
can be attributed to management practices such
as grazing pressures and fire. Poor management
of grazing in remnants can result in declining
condition of remnants through browsing, soil
compaction, reduced ground cover, changes in
structure and species composition, and weed
invasion.
Where vegetation is retained, it is important to
assess and manage the condition of the
vegetation and associated ecosystems to ensure
sustainability.
viii
The functioning of remnants can be impacted by

the size and shape of remaining vegetation, as
well as connectivity. Small remnants can be
impacted by large proportions of their area being
affected by changed physical conditions and
increased vulnerability to pest invasions. The
important role of remnants in the landscape
is discussed.
return to contents
Index
165
Index
Aboriginal people
fire management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 54, 88
Acacia aneura . . . . . . . . . . . . 49, 54, 57, 66, 75, 823, 87
Acacia argyrodendron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63, 85
Acacia cambagei. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63, 72, 86
Acacia harpophylla . . . . 57, 65, 67, 72, 75, 80, 823, 867
Acacia nilotica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Acacia shirleyi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Acacia spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 63, 72, 85
Acacia stenophylla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
acidification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Aepyprymnus rufescens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Albizia lebbeck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Alstonia constricta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
alternative products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8990, 93
animal production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813
heat stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
liveweight gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Anredera cordifolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Aristida spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 88
armillaria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Atalaya hemiglauca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Baccharis halimifolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
belalie (Acacia stenophylla). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
biodiversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 2631, 40, 104, 107, 119
conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 29, 42
decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
ecosystem
diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 27, 30
function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
genetic diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 27, 30
habitat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 4260
landscape health (see also ecosystem services) . . 22, 27
loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 40, 106
national policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2930
origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101
riparian zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
society benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 110
species
diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 27, 30
loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435, 50
bioregional planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114, 117
bioregions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 7
black speargrass (Heteropogon contortus) . . . . . 51, 75, 88
blackberry (Rubus fruticosus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
blackwood (Acacia argyrodendron) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63, 85
bluegrasses (Bothriochloa spp. and Dichanthium spp.) . . 51
Bothriochloa spp.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
166
brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) . . . . . 57, 65, 67, 72, 75, 80,

823, 867
brigalow development scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 89
Broadscale Tree Clearing Policy (BTCP). . 14, 189, 32, 120
buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris) 48, 501, 54, 63, 72, 75, 86
buffer zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54, 72, 81
bush foods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Cadellia pentastylis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Callitris columellaris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Callitris glaucophylla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Callitris spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Calyptorhynchus lathami. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Calyptorhynchus magnificus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
camphor laurel (Cinnamomum camphora) . . . . . . . . . . . 64
carrying capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Cassia nemophila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Casuarina spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61, 72
cats claw creeper (Macfadyena unguis-cati) . . . . . . . . . 64
Celtis sinensis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Cenchrus ciliaris. . . . . . . . . . . 48, 501, 54, 63, 72, 75, 86
Chinchilla white gum (Eucalyptus argophloia) . . . . . . . . 42
Chinese celtis (Celtis sinensis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Cinnamomum camphora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
climate change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
community participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 1013, 111
community values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
compaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
corridors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 468, 54, 567, 120
dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
Corymbia citriodora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
crop production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69, 801
Cryptostegia grandiflora. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 64, 88
cultural heritage values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Dawson gum (Eucalyptus cambageana) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
development
history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 106
Dichanthium spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
dieback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 36, 40, 48, 512, 602, 120
arboreal wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
drought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 36, 60, 62
insects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
mistletoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
nutrient enrichment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
pathogens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
salinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
senescence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
symptoms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
waterlogging. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
discharge areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Dodonaea viscosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
ecologically sustainable development (ESD) . . . . . . . 226

Brundtland Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
core objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
government adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
economic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103111
choice modelling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108, 110
contingent valuation method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078
cost benefit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 989, 1059
marginal analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056
off-site costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
economic issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98111
ecosystem function
repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 535
resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
threats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
ecosystem services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44, 93
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
ecotones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
ecotourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
edge effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 479, 64
microclimate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
El Nio Southern Oscillation (ENSO) . . . . . . . . . . 24, 31
Environmental Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999 (Cwlth) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 17
Eremocitrus glauca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Eremophila gilesii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Eremophila mitchellii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 53, 56, 647, 87, 10911
ground cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
management practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
pasture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 656
tree clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6455
vegetation cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Eucalyptus argophloia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Eucalyptus cambageana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Eucalyptus coolabah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Eucalyptus crebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67, 83
Eucalyptus erythrophloia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Eucalyptus grandis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 84
Eucalyptus intertexta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Eucalyptus laeviopinea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73, 75
Eucalyptus melanophloia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Eucalyptus melliodora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Eucalyptus ochrophloia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Eucalyptus populnea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50, 54, 67, 71, 834
Eucalyptus spp.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 63, 66, 71, 75, 83, 87
farm forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8993
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
national policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901
fire management. . . . . . . . . 36, 41, 49, 54, 63, 65, 8890
Fisheries Act 1994 (Qld). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Flooded gum (Eucalyptus grandis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 84

flower and foliage markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
fodder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802, 86, 89
fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 64
species loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
dispersal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467
ecosystem function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
isolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
remnant size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 457
freehold tenure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
freeholding leases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
gidgee (Acacia cambagei) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63, 72, 85
grazing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503, 63, 67, 81
artificial watering points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
erosion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
fauna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
fire management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
flora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
livestock handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81, 86
productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108, 121
remnants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 504
riparian zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
soil
acidification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 734
erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
fertility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
species change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501
sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
thickening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
green panic (Panicum maximum) . . . . . . . . . . 73, 83, 857
greenhouse
biomass estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
carbon
accounting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 356, 10910
trading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37, 90, 110
climate change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
effect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 317
emission reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
gas emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313, 104, 1089, 1101
international policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
land use change and forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 323
sinks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 32, 37
soil carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
thickening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
tree clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 356
Heteropogon contortus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 75, 88
honey production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89, 93
hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745
evaporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
167
hydrology (continued)
rainfall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
watertable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld) . . . . . . . . . 145, 1189
introduced legumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 78, 81, 867
kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Kyoto Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 32, 37
lancewood (Acacia shirleyi) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Land Act 1962 (Qld) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Land Act 1994 (Qld) . . 23, 145, 18, 20, 32, 89, 115, 119
cultural and heritage values. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
native title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
land degradation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6080, 104
cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
ecosystem function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
land tenure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Land Use Change and Forestry (LUCF). . . . . . . . 22, 327
landscape
ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114, 116
health. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Lantana camara. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
leaf litter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67, 71
leasehold tenure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
tree-clearing controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Leucaena leucocephala subsp. globate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Leucaena spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867
liveweight gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Local Agenda 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Local Government Act 1993 (Qld) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
LUCF see Land Use Change and Forestry
Macfadyena unguis-cati . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Macroptilium atropurpureum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Madeira vine (Anredera cordifolia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
mangroves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5960
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Medicago spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Melaleuca spp.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 60, 72, 75
microclimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81, 85
Montreal Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 91
mulga (Acacia aneura) . . . . . . 49, 54, 57, 66, 75, 823, 87
mycorrhizal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723
National Framework for Management and
Monitoring of Australias Native Vegetation . . . . . . 17, 54
National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGGI) . . . . 22, 337
National Greenhouse Strategy (NGS) . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 32
National Strategy for Australias Biodiversity . . . . . 22, 29
National Strategy on Ecologically Sustainable
Development (NSESD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
168
native pasture
communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 20
native title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
native vegetation
aesthetic values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81, 935, 1001
amenity values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935, 1001
coastal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
commercial values. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Commonwealth legislation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
community benefit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 989
condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
ecological benefits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
economic benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
erosion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
landholder attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
landholder perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 1023
local government controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1920
management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 535
monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11422
planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11422
national policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
non-remnant woody . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
non-use values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 107, 1101
nutrient cycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 713
pre-European . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Queensland legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
remnant size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
remnants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 4853
resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
retention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26, 434, 120
salt-tolerant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7980
social issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98111
society benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078
structural changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36, 512, 84, 87
thickening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
urban and peri-urban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
water uptake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Qld) . . . . . . . . 14, 189, 30
NGGI see National Greenhouse Gas Inventory
NGS see National Greenhouse Strategy
nitrogen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
cycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 72, 86
fixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 86
nutrient cycling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 713, 93
ooline (Cadellia pentastylis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
oversown legumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Panicum maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73, 83, 857
Parkinsonia aculeata. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Parthenium hysterophorus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
parthenium weed (Parthenium hysterophorus) . . . . . . . . 63
participatory approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 103

Paspalum dilatatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
pasture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61, 80, 837
exotic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 81, 83, 86
native . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 86
nutrient cycling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
oversown legumes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73, 83
productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
tree clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834
pest animals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624, 82
diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
pest plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624, 88
diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Phytophora cinnamomi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Pinus spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
planning
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145
poplar box (Eucalyptus populnea) . . . . 50, 54, 67, 71, 834
woodlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
precautionary principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
property management planning . . . . . . . . 103, 1145, 119
Prosopis velutina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Queensland Implementation Plan (QIP) . . . . . . . . . 22, 32
Quilpie mesquite (Prosopis velutina) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
rare species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
recharge
areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 79
rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 545, 79
regional ecosystems (REs) . . . . . . . 3, 7, 40, 114, 117, 119
biodiversity surrogates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 114, 117
conservation status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
mapping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 91
regional planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111, 114, 1168
regional strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114, 117
regional vegetation management plans (RVMPs) . 114, 119
regrowth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 7, 31, 41, 75, 80, 86, 87
rehabilitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
remnant vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 108, 11920
clumps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
strips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
REs see regional ecosystems
reserve system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 101
reserves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43, 105
restoration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
revegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 54, 79, 91
RFA see Regional Forest Agreement
Rhodes grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
riparian zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 53, 54, 568
buffers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
riparian zones (continued)

definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56, 589
habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
instream fauna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 578
large woody debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
rubber vine (Cryptostegia grandiflora) . . . . . . . . 58, 64, 88
Rubus fruticosus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
run-off . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53, 667, 74
Rural Lands Protection Act 1985 (Qld). . . . . . . 14, 189, 63
RVMPs see regional vegetation management plans
saline soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
salinity . . . . . . 41, 7480, 95, 98, 1045, 10710, 11920
climate and rainfall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 756
hazard modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789
impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 756
landform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
mapping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
soil properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
tree clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
vegetation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
salt-tolerant vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7980
shade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 82, 85
shelter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812, 85, 120
silver-leaved ironbark (Eucalyptus melanophloia) . . . . . . 51
siratro (Macroptilium atropurpureum) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
SLATS see Statewide Landcover and Trees Study
social issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98111
partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 103
sodic soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 76
soil
acidification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 734, 87
grazing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
land use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
remediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
tree clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
biota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356, 110
fauna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
fertility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 65, 72, 80, 84, 93
infiltration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723, 86
nutrients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71, 73
organic carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
organic matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 80
structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 50, 52, 6771
compaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 50, 53, 68
definition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
degradation
impacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6970
prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
169
soil (continued)
repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
soil water content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
tree clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71, 81, 85
spotted gum (Corymbia citriodora) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Statewide Landcover and Trees Study (SLATS) . 5, 35, 122
stock-carrying capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
stocking rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 82, 87
Stylosanthes spp.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74, 87
sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226, 1012, 121
biodiversity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245, 121
landholder adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
thresholds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
sustainable production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
170
Themeda triandra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
thickening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36, 512, 84, 109
threatened species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
threshold parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
thresholds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438
Thunbergia grandiflora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
timber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8993
tree clearing
animal production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1720, 111
crop production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801
cultural and heritage values. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
economic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103111
economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98111
erosion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
greenhouse gas emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
habitat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 4260
history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746
indirect off-site impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10910
introduced legumes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
land degradation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
native title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
nitrogen cycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
off-site effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 100
on-farm benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1089
organic carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
pasture production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835
pest management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
production benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 7
species decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
species loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428
tree hollows. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
tree management plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115, 1189
treecrop competition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801
treegrass interactions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 712, 835
animal production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812
moisture competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
nutrient competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Trifolium spp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Vegetation Management
Act 1999 (Qld) . . . . . . 2, 7, 14, 189, 32, 44, 58, 76, 119
Water Resources Act 1989 (Qld). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 189
weeds see pest plants
wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 589
definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
wildlife
dispersal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
refuges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
riparian zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
wind erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
windbreaks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 812
wiregrasses (Aristida spp.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 88
yapunyah (Eucalyptus ochrophloia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
yellow box (Eucalyptus melliodora) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
yellow jacket (Eucalyptus intertexta) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
zero till . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Ziziphus mauritiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
171
172
return to contents
Queenslands resources
Contributors
Queenslands land and vegetation resources
Bruce Wilson, Environmental Protection Agency
Sarah Boulter, Department of Natural Resources
Mirranie Barker, Department of Natural Resources
Jude Westrup, Department of Natural Resources
Landscape health
Tim Danaher, Department of Natural Resources
Summary
This section provides a brief introduction to
Queenslands land and vegetation resources, their
past and present state, and methods being used to
further refine knowledge of the current status of all
vegetation types.
Queensland is a large and diverse State. Climate
ranges from subtropical in the south-east to wet
and wetdry tropics in the north, and to semiarid
and arid in the south-west. Landscapes vary from
tall open forest, woodlands and tropical rain/vine
forests to semiarid woodlands grasslands and
deserts in the interior.
The unique mosaic of native flora in Queensland,
and all of Australia, is the result of global patterns
and processes of geomorphology, climate, evolution
and recruitment over geological time. Atmospheric
and oceanic perturbations in the form of the
El Nio Southern Oscillation (ENSO) have
contributed to climatic variability, particularly in the
eastern two thirds of Australia.
While the extent of the impact of Aboriginal land
use on vegetation dynamics prior to European
settlement is widely debated in the scientific
literature, there is some anecdotal and scientific
evidence that Aboriginal fire management may have
resulted in changes to the geographic and
demographic structure of many vegetation types.
While new technologies and agricultural techniques
have increased yields and outputs per unit area, the
overall condition and productivity of Queenslands
landscape have declined considerably over time.
This overall decline is a reflection of current and
1.1 Queenslands land and

vegetation resources
Queensland is a large and diverse State that lies
between latitudes 10S-29S and longitudes 138E153E. Climate ranges from subtropical in the south
east to wet and wetdry tropics in the north and to
semiarid and arid in the southwest. Queensland
supports about 65% of Australias known frog,
reptile, bird and mammal species, and 47% of its
vascular plant species (EPA 1999c). Landscapes
vary from tall open forest, woodlands, and tropical
rainforests and vine forests to semi-arid woodlands
grasslands and deserts in the interior.
Assessment of the extent, condition and
management of natural resources of such a diverse
State, both historically and in the future, requires
some classification based on the natural resource
factors that affect land use. Sattler and Williams
(1999) have described 13 bioregions of Queensland
and the major geology, landforms, soils, native
vegetation and ecosystem types that occur there.
These regions are used to provide a context for
2
historic land uses. Agricultural practices are

partially responsible for soil erosion and structural
decline, salinity, soil acidification, and native
pasture decline. Land degradation factors include
vegetation clearance as well as urbanisation,
agricultural practices, forestry and mining.
The rate of clearing in Queensland has increased
from 289 000 ha/year in 199195 to
340 000 ha/year in 199597. During this period,
clearing on leasehold land decreased by 12%,
while it increased on freehold land. The majority
of clearing was carried out to convert woody
vegetation to pasture.
Vegetation maps are being produced over substantial
parts of Queensland. These are particularly
important in determining the previous and current
extent of native vegetation, and therefore
conservation status, of regional ecosystems. It is
estimated that in 1995 approximately 81% of the
State was covered by remnant vegetation. Statistics
are given on the amount of remnant vegetation by
bioregion and subregion and by the status of
ecosystems under the Vegetation Management Act
1999 (Qld).
The bioregions of Queensland group the State into
areas with broadly similar landscape patterns.
These areas provide a useful context for assessing
the natural resources of the State. A summary of
these regions is provided in appendix 1. Appendix 2
details 14 native pasture communities of
Queensland used to make general assessments
about land capability, degradation and other landresource related issues.
biodiversity assessments and have been used to

develop tree-clearing guidelines under the Land Act
1994 (Qld) and Vegetation Management Act 1999
(Qld). A summary of each bioregion is given in
appendix 1.
Weston et al. (1981) have produced a map (see
figure 1.1, p.9) and description of 14 native pasture
communities of Queensland. These are widely used
to make general assessments about the capability,
degradation and other land-resource related issues
and are summarised in appendix 2.
Pre-European settlement vegetation

Australia supports a rich diversity of vegetation,
both in structure and composition. This diversity is
particularly demonstrated by the presence of a high
proportion of species endemic to the Australian
continent. Also unique to the Australian flora are
the presence of unusual structural attributes, in
particular scleromorphy, and the dominance of two
tree and shrub groups, Eucalyptus spp. and
Acacia spp. (Barlow 1994; Fox 1999). The origin,
adaptation and differentiation of the regional
Prior to European settlement, Aboriginal land use,

migration and fire patterns also influenced
vegetation composition and distribution (AUSLIG
1990; Barlow 1994; Bowman 1998; Groves 1999;
Orchard and Wilson 1999). Although a highly
contentious issue, there is evidence that Aboriginal
burning, in particular, may have played a role in
the modification and maintenance of the Australian
flora (Bowman 1998). Some authors have used
explorer and early settler quotes to suggest that
Aboriginal burning created a structurally more
open grasslands and grassy woodland landscape
(Ryan et al. 1995). However, Benson and Redpath
(1997), in a review of scientific evidence and
historical sources, refute this conclusion,
suggesting that this analysis over emphasises the
influence of Aboriginal fire management and
ignores the evidence that climate was the major
determinant of vegetation change and distribution.
There is, however, considerable evidence that
Aboriginal people used fire to achieve short-term
ecological outcomes, creating habitat mosaics that
favoured some species or increased local
abundances of food plants. Bowman (1998) cites a
large body of ecological evidence that suggests
Aboriginal burning may have resulted in changes to
the geographic range and demographic structure of
many vegetation types. Anderson (1999) notes,
however, that Indigenous fire management arises
from diffuse social, cultural, spiritual and
ecological practices rather than a desire to meet
certain management or biodiversity goals.
structure, composition and diversity of Australias

vegetation have been attributed to global patterns
and processes of geomorphology, climate, evolution
and recruitment over geological time. Rainfall,
associated temperature patterns and climatic
variability in particular has been significant in
determining vegetation distribution and change.
Atmospheric and oceanic perturbation in the form
of El Nio Southern Oscillation (ENSO) have
contributed to historic climatic variability,
particularly in the eastern two-thirds of Australia.
Nicholls (1991) suggests that this variability can be
viewed as causing an adaptation to climate in such
a way that demographic composition (of
vegetation) is in a state of unstable equilibrium.
These factors, in association with changes and
effects over geological time (see table1.1), have
created the unique mosaic of Australian flora.
Table 1.1 Factors influencing pre-1770 diversity, distribution
and structure of Australian flora. Adapted from Barlow
1994; Fox 1999; Specht 1994; Groves 1999; Frakes 1999.
Major factor
Associated factors
location
southern and oceanic hemisphere

location, meridional, latitude and
Indo-Australian position, insularity,
age, size, shape and physiognomy
climate
circulation patterns, rainfall patterns

and seasonality, insolation,
temperature, albedo, variability, ENSO
landforms and soils
soil type, drainage, nutrient levels
fire
lightning strikes, anthropogenic
Queenslands terrestrial vegetation communities

can be broadly grouped into forests (including
woodlands), arid shrublands, grasslands,
heathlands and wetlands (EPA 1999c). For the
purposes of conservation, Queenslands
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently
published a hierarchical framework classifying
Queenslands vegetation into Regional Ecosystems
(REs) (Sattler and Williams 1999). The recording of
some 1084 REs based on dominant vegetation,
geomorphic land zone and bioregion, demonstrates
the wide range and diversity of habitats existing
across the State (Williams 1979; EPA 1999c) (see
section 1.2.1).
The importance of these evolutionary factors in

creating Australias rich and unique flora is in
trying to understand the landscape for management
and conservation of the extant biodiversity.
Table 1.2 Post-1990 estimates of land degradation by State and land use. Adapted from RIRDC 2000; Cregan and Scott 1998;
*Hayes 1997.
Soil health issues by State
Soil structure decline/compaction
NSW
`000 ha
QLD
`000 ha
VIC
`000 ha
TAS
`000 ha
14 695
2 645
10 530
317
Sheet and rill
2 288
1 343
3 180
226
Gully and tunnel
9 460
4 220
340
1 630
321
Wind erosion
20 045
74 000
SA
`000 ha
1 300
8 300
Wind/water in rangeland
Salinity
WA
`000 ha
50
7 300
*120
*10
*120
*20
* 402
Acid soils (pH Ca<4.8)
13 500
8 400
3 000
1 000
2 800
4 700
Area of State
801 690
172 720
22 760
6 780
98 400
252 550
Note: Blank cells indicate no data yet found. Cells are not exclusive and area may be affected by several types of land degradation.
*1 804
1.2 Landscape health

There is considerable evidence that the condition
and productivity of Queenslands lands have
declined over time (e.g. Mills et al. 1989; Tothill &
Gillies 1992). The health of the landscape in
Queensland reflects current and historic land-use
practices (see section 2.2 for history of
development and section 4.2 for some current
effects of land-use practices). In reporting on the
state of the environment in Queensland, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1999c)
recorded the contribution of some agricultural
practices to soil erosion and structure decline,
salinity, soil acidification (table 1.2), and native
pasture decline. In a collaborative report, the
Australian Conservation Foundation and National
Farmers Federation (Virtual Consulting Group &
Griffin nrm 2000), identified the degradation of
Australias resource base and environment as a
national issue and not just a farming issue, with
profound economic, social and ecological impacts.
They estimated the annual cost of degradation as
at least $2 billion, with potential to increase to
$6 billion annually by 2020 (see table 1.3). In their
analysis, they identify production benefits and
other benefits that reside mostly in the domain of
the public, and recommend strategic investment by
both government and the private sector.
Table 1.3 Cost estimates of land and water degradation.
Source: Virtual Consulting Group and Griffin nrm (2000).
Form of degradation
270
Acid soils
300
Sodic soils or structural decline
200
Irrigation salinity
Water quality
Total
80
65
450
1 365
The EPA (1999c) identified a number of land

degradation factors, including pest invasions,
vegetation clearance, urbanisation, land
contamination, forestry and mining and their
relationship to the condition of land resources (see
table 1.4). A number of these ecosystem health
issues are explored in greater detail in section 3.2.
While tree clearing is a factor in land degradation
issues, particularly in regard to loss of biodiversity,
deterioration and degradation of pastoral lands is
primarily attributed to inappropriate land
management practices. For example, de Corte et al.
(1991), reported extensive soil erosion and
increases in woody weeds in a survey area where
tree clearing was very limited.
In an assessment of the condition of northern
Australian pasture communities in 1991, Tothill
and Gillies (1992) recorded the condition of
4
Table 1.4 Overview of relationships between pressures on,

and condition of land resources. Source: EPA 1999c.
Pressure
Resulting condition if
pressures are poorly managed
Underlying pressures
Underlie and/or exacerbate many

of the following pressures
- weather and climate

- population growth
- economic pressures
Vegetation clearance
Degraded soils, particularly:

- erosion
- dryland salinity
Spread of noxious species
(can lead to degraded soils)
Increased grass cover
Agriculture
- bare surface production
systems
- intensive cultivation
- grazing and associated
fire regimes
- application of fertilisers
and agricultural chemicals
- irrigation
- introduction of exotic
species
Erosion (can lead to loss of
soil fertility and structure)
Soil fertility decline
Soil structure decline
Urbanisation
Loss of productive land
Land contamination from wastes
Pest plants and animals
Pest plants and animals

(can lead to native pasture decline
and erosion)
Forestry operations
Depletion of forest resources

Erosion and chemical
contamination of soils
Mining
Depletion of mineral resources

Disturbed land
Land contamination from wastes
Estimate
($ million per year)
Salinity
Erosion
19 communities in Queensland (see table 1.5). This

assessment has not been repeated, and some
authors suggest that the results may, in part, reflect
the pasture condition during an El Nio event, and
therefore underrate pasture condition (B. Burrows
2000, pers. comm., 24 April). Changes in pasture
composition and other aspects of land degradation
are due to various combinations of factors. The
following identifies some of the more important
factors in grazing lands:
increased grazing pressures from domestic, feral
and native animals
reduced burning or controlled burning regimes
provision of stock watering facilities
use of bore drains
use of feed supplements
climatic extremes
declining soil fertility status
development of salinisation
changes in animal types and breeds
indirect factors such as the need to service
property debt and maintain cash flows.
Irrigation salinity
Acidification
Land contamination
Noxious plants and animals
(can lead to native pasture
decline and erosion)
Native pasture decline
Table 1.5 Assessment of condition of rangelands in northern

Queensland in 1991. Adapted from Tothill & Gillies, 1992.
Pasture
community
Condition assessment
1991 (%)
Sustainable
condition
Deteriorating Degraded
Plume sorghum
90
Schirizachyrium
22
66
12
Rainforest
40
50
10
Heathland pastures
not assessed
Bladygrass
17
62
21
Black speargrass
32
52
16
Ribbongrass
95
nil
AristidaBothriochloa
50
33
17
Seasonal riverine plains
40
40
20
Brigalow pastures
40
37
23
Gidgee pastures
35
32
33
Queensland bluegrass
26
36
38
Bluegrassbrowntop
20
75
Mitchell grass
58
33
Spinifex
52
34
14
Mulga
perennial shortgrass
19
52
29
Georgina gidgee
70
20
10
Saltwater couch
90
Mulga
annual shortgrass
20
40
40
Many ecological processes are poorly understood

for most of Queenslands native vegetation
communities (Australian Science and Technology
Council 1993), particularly the relationship
between tree clearing and hydrology, nutrient
cycling (Harrington 1990) and native fauna (Recher
& Lim 1990). Tree clearing has been identified as a
significant factor in the loss of biodiversity, salinity
risk, changes in nutrient cycling, missed production
opportunities (as well as gains), and reduced water
quality (e.g. EPA 1999c; RIRDC 2000).
1.2.1 Rate of clearing

An essential part of determining the impact of
vegetation clearing is having accurate data about
the extent of land clearing and overall vegetation
cover. In 1995 the Queensland Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) initiated the Statewide
Landcover and Trees Study (SLATS) to monitor the
change in woody vegetation cover over Queensland
(DNR 1999b). Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM)
imagery (30 m resolution) is used to compare the
vegetation cover between 1988, 1991, 1995, 1997
and 1999 over the entire State. Images are analysed
using a combination of automated and manual
interpretation techniques on computer workstations.
This is followed by a period of field checking for
each satellite scene. To date, the 199195 and
199597 change detection has been completed for
the entire State (DNR 1999a, DNR 1999b).
Describing the period between 199597, the DNR

(1999b) reported an average annual State-wide
clearing rate of 340 000 ha/year (see figure 1.2,
p.10), which is an increase on the 199195 average
of 289 000 ha/year. The current preliminary
estimate of 198891 clearing is 475 000 ha/year
(25%) (DNR 1999b). The greatest proportion of
clearing occurred in the brigalow belt bioregion with
this accounting for 57% of total clearing. By
combining clearing data with Digital Cadastral Data
Base and Tenures Administration System data, DNR
(1999b) reported that during the 199597 period
approximately 40% of clearing occurred on
leasehold land, 57% on freehold land and the
remaining 3% on Crown land and other tenures.
The 199597 rate of clearing on leasehold tenure
was 12% less than the 199195 rate, while on
freehold tenure it increased by 54% (DNR 1999b).
In their analysis of vegetation change data, DNR
(1999b) reported that approximately 86% of woody
vegetation change was clearing of woody
vegetation to pasture. However, there was a
significant increase in the proportion of land
cleared for cropping between 199195 and
199597 from 4 to 9% respectively.
An important consideration in assessing clearing is
determining the proportion that was regrowth
treatment of areas previously cleared. In the SLATS
report, the proportion of 199597 clearing for
regrowth control could not be accurately
calculated, requiring the analysis of earlier
sequences of imagery. However, using 1988 and
1991 imagery, DNR (1999b) did identify that a
minimum of 18% of the 199597 clearing was
regrowth control. This proportion may increase as
earlier imagery is analysed and older regrowth
identified. A partial analysis based on EPAs
remnant vegetation mapping (see section 1.2.2)
indicates that regrowth control may account for
3040% of clearing.
The report was also able to detect a significant
amount of natural tree death in the area covered by
Dalrymple Shire (west of Townsville) due to a
prolonged drought. In total, an area of 69 000 ha
was affected over the period 199197, with most
death believed to have occurred in the 199497
period (DNR 1999b).
7 314
North
West
Highlands
22 001
Gulf
Plains
12 167
Cape
York
Peninsula
24 183
Mitchell
Grass
Downs
(not threatened Annual

by clearing)4
clearing
0.4
Annual
clearing
100
Reserves
100
21 948
3.4
38.6
213.8
44.5
99
12 096
1.7
11 799
NA
294.0
NA
3.0
NA
0.1
18.3
133.9
152.2
84
20 201
5.8
19 896
NA
NA
9.8
304.4
0.35
4.6
0.05
100
23 770
1.9
23 764
NA
5.0
23 815
Channel
Country
22.0
44.0
208.8
2.5
6.4
40.4
83
15 310
29.2
14 986
9.0
274.8
0.2
49.3
18 500
Mulga
Lands
45.0
24.0
31.0
2.4
1.6
4.0
58
1 153
1.8
1 045
NA
11.0
NA
89.0
NA
1 983
Wet
Tropics
95.6
9.5
8.3
20.6
22.6
72
1 039
1.3
883
12.0
1.7
93.0
1.3
51.4
1 444
Central
Qld
Coast
3.0
89.0
8.0
93
11 082
4.0
10 982
0.12
100.0
0.01
2.0
11 861
Einasleigh
Uplands
Footnotes
1
Conservation status as defined under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld)
Endangered defined as <10% of preclearing extent or 1030% if remnant area <10 000 ha
Of concern defined as 1030% of preclearing extent or >30% if remnant area <10 000 ha
No concern at present defined as >30% of preclearing extent and remnant area >10 000 ha
2
2000 remnant calculated by extrapolating from 1997 using 19951997 clearing rates
3
Threatened by clearing defined as <80% of preclearing area remaining
4
Clearing includes non-woody vegetation such as grasslands
5
Reserves include all conservation tenures and State forests
6
Mapping source reliability
a Mapping completed for 80-100% of area impacted by tree clearing. Subject to minor review. Estimated error in remnant areas is +/-10%
b Little mappingresults derived from estimates but region not greatly impacted by tree clearing. Estimated error in remnant areas is +/-10%
c Little mappingresults derived from estimates and subject to review. Estimated error in remnant areas is +/-25%
Leasehold
Reserves5
Leasehold
Freehold
Freehold
MAPPING
SOURCE/RELIABILITY6
Of concern
Endangered
NA
NA
21 948
REMNANT AREA BY STATUS BY TENURE
% OF REGION
7 281
7 281
Remnant
TOTAL REMNANT
AREA 2000
No concern
at present
Remnant
Of concern
Annual
clearing
(threatened
by clearing)3
Annual
clearing
Remnant
Remnant
Of concern
Endangered
STATUS BY REMNANT AREA (2000) AND ANNUAL CLEARING (19951997)
TOTAL AREA
Region
2.9
113.4
30.9
0.5
0.4
80
5 647
27.1
5 499
0.05
26.6
2.0
73.7
0.03
0.9
7 031
Desert
Uplands
196.2
1 046.3
937.3
55.7
320.2
320.2
40
14 395
58.2
11 519
.01
66.5
49.3
2 113.4
20.4
696.0
36 418
Brigalow
Belt
167.3
35.2
237.7
44.0
15.2
92.7
39
2 445
7.5
1 853
0.06
88.5
3.3
351.6
0.14
151.8
6 212
South
East
Qld
Table 1.6 Summary of remnant area (2000), annual clearing by the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld) status1 across the bioregions of Queensland. All areas in ha x 10-3.
6
a
6.7
1.3
59.1
1.6
1.4
20.0
34
266
0.3
176
1 100
0.6
66.1
0.18
23.0
775
New
England
Tlands
500.3
1 801.2
1 719.2
114.4
365.9
500.3
79
136 635
142.8
131 634
0.24
604.7
75.8
3 368.9
24.0
980.7
173 705
Total
1.2.2 Current extent of regional

ecosystems
The Queensland Herbarium has been producing
vegetation maps and survey reports since the early
1970s. This program has been accelerated during
the 1990s as the lack of vegetation mapping over
substantial parts of Queensland has limited the
scope and quality of land use decision making
and sustainable land management. The information
derived from this survey and mapping has a wide
range of uses, but is particularly important in
determining the previous and current extent,
and therefore conservation status, of regional
ecosystems.
This section gives a summary of statistics derived
from this survey and mapping completed to April 5
2000, on the remnant area and clearing rates by
the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld) status
across the bioregions of Queensland (see table 1.6
and figure 1.3, p.11). Details about the surveying
mapping methodology are outlined in appendix 3.
It is estimated that in 1995 approximately 81% of
the State was covered by remnant vegetation (see
table 1.6).
over 650 000 ha of the of concern regional

ecosystems have greater than 80% of their
preclearing distribution remaining. These
ecosystems are listed because of their limited
extent, but are often not suited to, or are
currently threatened by, land clearance (e.g. this
category includes many naturally restricted
heathlands and shrublands that occur on skeletal
soils).
In the 199597 period about 7% (17 000 ha) of the
total amount of remnant clearing occurred in
endangered ecosystems, while 33% (77 000 ha)
occurred in of concern ecosystems, and the
remaining 60% (142 000 ha) occurred in no
concern at present ecosystems.
These clearing figures differ from those on total
woody vegetation reported previously (see section
1.2.1). They do not include the clearing of nonremnant (e.g. regrowth) woody vegetation and
some areas of remnant clearing that are beyond the
scale of mapping (<5 ha), but do include the
clearing of non-woody vegetation. In the 199597
period, about 6065% of the total 340 000 ha of
woody vegetation that was cleared occurred in areas
mapped as remnant vegetation by the herbarium.
The amount of remnant vegetation across

individual bioregions ranged from 3040% in the
New England Tableland, Brigalow Belt and
Southeast Queensland regions to 98100% in the
Channel Country, Northwest Highlands and Cape
York Peninsula regions (see figure 1.3, p.11).
The amount of remnant vegetation varied across
provinces within bioregions (figure 1.3). The
Brigalow Belt in particular showed the highest
variability with the amount of provinces cleared
ranging from less than 15% to over 90%.
The amount of remnant vegetation varies across
different ecosystems within bioregions (see table
1.6). Under the Vegetation Management Act 1999
(Qld) status classification, as at January 2000 it is
estimated that:
approximately 1 000 000 ha (approximately
0.5% of the State) are classified as endangered
regional ecosystems (<10% of preclearing extent
remains or, 1030% if total remnant area is
<10 000 ha). Of this, about 500 000 ha occur on
freehold land, 370 000 ha on leasehold land, and
114 000 ha on protected areas, reserves, State
forest etc.
over 4 000 000 ha (2.5%) are classified as of
concern regional ecosystems (10-30% of
preclearing extent remains or >30% if total
remnant area is <10 000 ha). Of this, about
1 700 000 ha occur on freehold land,
1 800 000 ha occur on leasehold land and
500 000 ha occur on reserves/State forests etc.
Pasture sparse or absent
Mulga pasture
Bladygrass
Mitchell grass
Black speargrass
Spinifex
Queensland bluegrass
Channel pasture
Brigalow pasture
Bluegrassbrowntop
AristidaBothric
Schizachyrium pasture
Gidgee pasture
Native sorghum
Figure 1.1 Native pasture communities. Source: DNR.
Native pasture communities
10
Figure 1.2 Average annual clearing rate (199597). Source DNR 1999b.
Figure 1.3 Map of Queensland showing the percentage of each province covered by remnant vegetation. Data used is remnant
vegetation mapping by the Queensland Herbarium completed April 2000. Source: EPA.
11
12
Figure 2.1 Land Tenures in Queensland (1997). Source DNR 1999b.
return to contents
Land tenure and legislation
Contributors
Land tenure and legislation
Mirranie Barker, Department of Natural Resources
Native title issues
Cyril Cordery, Department of Natural Resources
13
Summary
This section discusses the differences between
freehold and leasehold tenures, the history of land
management in Australia with particular reference to
Queensland, opportunities for managing vegetation
under different tenures and legislation that effects
native vegetation management in Queensland.
Property rights at law are the relationship that
an individual has with an object.
Under freehold tenure, the landholder, in effect,
owns the land, although ownership is not
absolute as the State retains certain rights to the
land e.g. mineral rights which may be exercised
at any time. The State may also control land use
with legislation.
Under leasehold tenure, land is leased from the
freehold owner (often the State), under strict
conditions, for a defined period, and rent is
usually payable. Leasehold tenure, and the
conditions under which these leases are held,
are administered under the Land Act 1994 (Qld).
Approximately 68% of Queensland is held under
some form of leasehold tenure.
Early European settlement saw the development
and clearing of considerable areas. Early clearing
of properties involved the cutting and ringbarking
of trees to improve pasture growth, but little
emphasis was placed on utilising the cleared
timber. Early legislation sought to realise the
commercial value of timber cut on properties. In
the mid 1900s, various schemes such as the
Brigalow Land Development Scheme, were run to
encourage development of the land. This
included encouraging the clearing of large areas
of land to secure ownership. Subsequent
legislation has been developed to protect and
sustain native vegetation values.
Currently in Queensland, the Broadscale Tree
Clearing Policy governs the clearing of trees on
leasehold land. A lessee must obtain approval to
clear under the Land Act 1994 (Qld). An
application for clearing must be accompanied by
a tree management plan detailing the type, area
and location of vegetation proposed to be cleared.
On the proclamation of the Vegetation
Management Act 1999 (Qld), amendments to the
Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld) (IPA) will
require that owners of freehold land submit an
application before clearing vegetation, although
there are several important exemptions.
14
At the Commonwealth level, there are a number

of policy and legislative documents that relate to
vegetation management. These include a
national framework for Management and
Monitoring of Australias Native Vegetation and
the Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999 (Cwlth) (EPBC), which has
implications for management of native vegetation
in Queensland. The EPBC provides that actions
deemed likely to have a significant impact on the
environment are subject to a rigorous
assessment and approval process. This has the
potential to protect threatened species and
ecological communities.
Other State legislation important to native
vegetation management includes:
- Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Qld)
- Water Resources Act 1989 (Qld)
- Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld)
- Rural Lands Protection Act 1985 (Qld)
There are several native title considerations to be
made with respect to vegetation management.
After the Mabo decision in the High Court in
1992, it was recognised that the Crown does not
hold absolute title over all land, and that the
rights of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
people, according to their laws and customs,
should be recognised. The Native Title Act 1993
(Cwlth) (amended in 1998) recognises native title
rights, provides validation for past acts that may
be invalid under native title, and provides a
process by which claims for native title and
compensation can be determined.
Cultural heritage values, which are independent
of tenure, may require conservation and
management to protect their cultural heritage
significance. Legislation providing for this is
currently being drafted.
The Land Act 1994 (Qld) also makes provisions
for the consideration of both native title and
cultural heritage values in assessing tree-clearing
permits.
2.1 Leasehold and freehold

tenures
The common understanding of property in western
societies is that a property owner has a right to
exclusive ownership and control. At law, however,
property is defined not as the object or land itself,
but the relationship that an individual has with that
object (Hepburn 1998). In essence, a landholder
does not own the land, but a bundle of rights to
that property. These principles operate in
Queensland historically at common law (unwritten
law based on custom or court decisions) and are
incorporated in statute law. At common law there
are two doctrines that govern these legally
enforceable property rights:
The doctrine of tenure provides that radical or
ultimate tenure (cf. beneficial ownership) to all
land is vested in the Crown2, and the landholder
merely holds land of the Crown.
The doctrine of estates provides that a
landholder does not own land, but an estate in
it. In essence, an estate is a right to possession
or enjoyment for a defined duration (Tooher &
Dwyer 1997).
Freehold land is the most complete alienation of
land from the State, although ownership is not
absolute, as the State is empowered to withhold
certain rights e.g. mineral rights. In addition, use of
the land may be controlled by legislation, for
example, the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld), and
Local Government Act 1993 (Qld). (DNR 1998a).
Leasehold tenure is the right to use land for the
duration of the lease, after which time the land
reverts to the freehold owner (which may be the
State). Under leasehold ownership, rent is generally
payable and conditions of use may be imposed by
the lease agreement.
The distinction between freehold and leasehold
tenure is significant for the management of native
vegetation in Queensland, as each tenure type
offers different avenues for State legislative controls.
In Queensland, the Land Act 1994 (Qld) (the Act)
regulates the administration and management of
non-freehold land (in particular, leasehold land), as
well as the creation of freehold land. There are
three main types of leases under the Act:
term leases (for a term anywhere between 1 and
100 years)
perpetual leases (held by the lessee in perpetuity)
freeholding leases (these are leases where the
issue of freehold title has been approved, but
freehold title is issued only after the lessee
finalises the payment of the purchase price).
The Act makes certain provisions relating to

leasehold interests. They include:
the duration of a term lease shall be no greater
than 50 years, or 100 years in some
circumstances (Land Act 1994 (Qld) s. 155)
an obligation to pay rent to the State (Land Act
1994 (Qld) Chapter 5, Part 1)
obligations to fulfil lease conditions that may
cover a variety of matters from residency to
development and improvements (Land Act 1994
(Qld) Chapter 5, Part 2). These conditions are
usually negotiated with the lessee
lease conditions can be reviewed every 1015
years for new leases under the Land Act 1994
(Qld) (s. 211)
restrictions on land use in accordance with lease
conditions and the purpose of the lease (Land Act
1994 (Qld) s. 153 and Chapter 5, Part 2,
Division 1)
restrictions on who may hold certain lease types
(e.g. corporations cannot hold grazing
homestead perpetual leases) (Land Act 1994
(Qld) Chapter 4, Part 2, Division 2)
restrictions on subdivision of leases (Land Act
1994 (Qld) Chapter 6, Part 4, Division 5), which
relates to maintaining viable property sizes
aggregation controls also apply to certain lease
types, for example, no more than two living
areas of grazing homestead perpetual leases can
be held by an individual (Land Act 1994 (Qld)
s. 146)3
a liability to forfeiture of the lease for noncompliance with lease conditions of the Act,
non-payment of rent, or if the lessee acquired
the lease by fraud (Land Act 1994 (Qld) s. 234).
Approximately 68% of Queensland is held under
leasehold tenure. The balance of land is made up of
freehold estates and a small proportion under other
tenures (table 2.1 and figure 2.1, p.12). The Act
allows for the conversion of leasehold land to
freehold tenure by application, unless the lease is
over a reserve or is a term lease granted for
pastoral purposes (Land Act 1994 (Qld) Chapter 4,
Part 3, Division 3Conversion of tenure). A lessee
may be entitled to pay the purchase price off over a
term of years, with the maximum term to repay
being 30 years (DNR 1998a).
Table 2.1 The area of land covered by different tenures in
1997. Adapted from DNR (1999b).
Tenure
Queensland
Leasehold
Freehold
Other tenures (Commonwealth
lands, mining tenures, main
roads, water, railways, ports,
action pending, etc)
Other reserves (State forest,
timber reserves, national parks)
Totals
Area (km2)
1 184 435
67.9
424 641
24.3
23 292
1.3
114 017
6.5
1 746 385
100.0
15
Leases from the State are granted for a purpose,

e.g. business, grazing, pastoral and residential
development. In the case of leases granted for
pastoral purposes, the land may be used only for
grazing or agriculture. Although a lease is issued
for a particular purpose, the Minister may approve
the conduct of additional or fewer uses on the
subject land for the term of the lease. The Act also
provides a statutory obligation of a duty of care for
the land (DNR 1998a).
2.2 European settlement and

development
We had at length discovered a country ready for the
immediate reception of civilised man, and fit to
become eventually one of the great nations of the
earth...Of this Eden it seemed I was the only Adam;
and it was indeed a sort of paradise to me.
Explorer Thomas Mitchell
The arrival of European settlers saw the succession

of a new culture to Australia. With it came an
inherent tradition of land management and uses
based on European experience, and concepts of
sustainability that were not appropriate to the
Australian environment. The resulting impact of
development and management practices on the
Australian biota is widely acknowledged and
described (see section 1.2 Landscape health).
The economic development of the early colony, and
later the State of Queensland, was closely linked to
the pastoral industry. While the British Colonial
Office maintained a policy of governmentcontrolled settlement, squatters saw the
opportunity of millions of hectares of unoccupied
land and took what they could defend (Roberts
1968). The new Queensland parliament faced early
conflicts, with pastoralists seeking large areas of
land and town interests seeking smaller holdings.
In 1860, a series of four land Acts were introduced
to cover various aspects of land-use policy and
tenure. The primary aim of the initial legislation
was to secure rapid, efficient and real
settlement...in pastoral land (Kingston 1965). The
Unoccupied Crown Lands Occupation Act 1860
allowed for the creation of agricultural reserves
under the condition that basic improvements,
including housing, fencing and clearing be
undertaken (Powell 1998). The Act provided that
the land should be stocked within twelve months or
be subject to forfeiture (Kingston 1965). This
emphasis on stocking and developing the country
carried on into later legislation. Early pastoralists
used ring barking as a quick and cheap method of
improving pastures without the cost of cutting and
clearing timber. Much of the timber cleared from
pastoral lands was wasted. Sheep provided greater
returns for significantly less effort than timber,
transportation of which was difficult. Trees were
believed to be an inexhaustible resource, so
16
wastage of timber on pastoral properties did not

initially concern the government (Bolton 1992;
Powell 1998).
The early history of Queensland saw a government
preference for granting leasehold tenure for pastoral
land, while encouraging closer settlement for
agriculture with freehold tenure. This is still
reflected in the distribution of these tenures today
(see figure 2.1, p.12). Further, to encourage land
development, a number of major government
settlement schemes and incentives, which
incorporated land clearing, were established for
land development. This continued until recently
with the Brigalow Land Development Scheme
running from 1960 to 1985. Under this scheme,
allocated blocks of land were drawn in a ballot,
with winners having to demonstrate their ability to
develop the land. Clearing of large blocks of
vegetation was encouraged in property development
plans, although there was some provision for
retaining areas for conservation purposes
(Breckwoldt 2000).
Over time, improvements in the efficiency of
clearing methods, and agricultural research, enabled
cost-effective development of a wider range of land
types. Early development was associated with
clearing for cropping and involved felling trees with
axes and the digging out or burning of tree stumps.
The subsequent adoption of ring barking trees to
increase growth of pastures affected greater areas.
This phase of clearing lasted until the 1950s. After
World War II, the availability of heavy machinery
(surplus war equipment), and the development of
chemicals for stem injection, gave further impetus
to larger areas of land development. The
development and introduction of improved pasture
grasses and legumes accompanied this, again
increasing the development of properties. Larger
tractors became available in the early 1960s and
were extensively used in the Brigalow Land
Development Scheme. Continued increases in the
power of machines enabled their use for clearing
eucalypt communities. Most clearing is currently
undertaken using a large chain pulled by two
bulldozers. Blade ploughs are particularly effective
for regrowth control of root-suckering species, and
have become popular in Queensland since 1980,
despite their high cost. Increased stocking rates and
crop yields were achieved by the introduction of
new practices and technologies such as the
introduction of heat-tolerant and tick resistant
Brahman cattle breeds, new pasture species and
new crop varieties (Turner 1975; Breckwoldt 2000).
Few foresaw the possible environmental
implications of uncontrolled tree clearing during the
early history of Queensland. In 1803, the effects of
early land clearing prompted Governor King to
issue a proclamation forbidding the felling of trees
along rivers and watercourses in order to prevent
further erosion and flooding (Bolton 1992). Despite

large fines, the directive was clearly disregarded
(Powell 1998). Other minority groups also voiced
concern that continued extensive tree clearing
would have a detrimental impact on climate and
rainfall (Powell 1998). Apart from a concern with
the impact of deforestation on climate, an influential
lobbyist group, the Acclimatisation Society of
Queensland, promoted the importation of exotic
species of plants and animals to improve the
Australian environment.
The value of timber was later recognised, and by
1839 licenses were required to cut red cedar from
Crown lands. The Crown Lands Alienation Act 1876
introduced prohibition on cutting a number of
timber species on vacant Crown land or pastoral
leases (Powell 1998). As timber became more
valuable, speculators would obtain cheap land,
remove all the timber and forfeit the selection
(Frawley 1983). In 1884, new legislation sought to
claim a royalty on certain timbers cut from
leasehold interests. Though this was overturned in
1888, attempts in 1886 under the Crown Lands Act
Amendment Act 1886, to reduce timber speculation
on selections, resulted in the limiting of timber
cutting without the Land Commissions permission,
by payment of a royalty if the landholder sold the
timber within the first five years of the lease
(Department of Public Lands 1926; Powell 1998). It
became practice for genuine selectors to simply
destroy the timber, while speculators waited for the
first five years before extracting the valuable timber
(Frawley 1983). This early control was aimed at
Crown realisation of the commercial value of
timber.
2.3 Managing vegetation

Commonwealth legislation and national
policies
While States retain primary legislative power to
regulate management of natural resources, the
Commonwealth government has progressively
increased the extent to which it endeavours to
influence or support the policies of State and
Territory jurisdictions (Griffin nrm 1999). The scale
of some land and water degradation issues, as well
as obligations associated with international treaties
on environmental issues (e.g. greenhouse and
biodiversity), are frequently the drivers in this
increased Commonwealth role. Of particular
significance to native vegetation, the Commonwealth
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Act 1999 (EPBC), which comes into force in July
2000, has significant potential to impact on native
vegetation. The EPBC Act provides that certain
actions (i.e. a project development, undertaking or
activities) which are likely to have a major impact
on a matter of national environmental significance,
are subject to a rigorous assessment and approval
process. The EPBC Act contains an extensive

regime for the conservation of biodiversity
including:
identification and monitoring of biodiversity, and
the preparation of bioregional plans
listing of nationally threatened species and
ecological communities
the identification of key threatening processes.
The matters of environmental significance that are
identified as triggers for the Commonwealth
assessment and approval process include
nationally threatened species and ecological
communities (Commonwealth of Australia 1999). It
is conceivable that individual plant species and
regional ecosystems could be included under this.
An issue such as tree clearing could also be
included as a key threatening process. The
Commonwealth has also flagged its intention to
include greenhouse issues as triggers under the
EPBC Act.
Other Commonwealth legislation that potentially
affects native vegetation includes:
Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975 (Cwlth)
Australian Quarantine Act 1908 (Cwlth)
Natural Heritage Trust of Australia Act 1997 (Cwlth)
Natural Resources Management (Financial
Assistance) Act 1992 (Cwlth)
Primary Industries and Energy Research and
Development Act 1989 (Cwlth).
Further, there is a considerable body of national
policies, strategies and plans also directly relating
to native vegetation management, most of which
have been negotiated between the Commonwealth
and the States (table 2.2). Recently, the
Commonwealth has drafted the National
Framework for Management and Monitoring of
Australias Native Vegetation (Commonwealth of
Australia 2000). An initiative of the Australian and
New Zealand Environment and Conservation
Council (ANZECC), the framework describes three
key elements to implement a unified goal in
managing Australias native vegetation:
desired native vegetation outcomes
best practice management and monitoring
mechanisms
work plans (actions and timelines for each
jurisdiction).
17
Table 2.2 Key national policies, strategies and plans relevant

to native vegetation. Source: Griffin nrm 1999.
1989
MurrayDarling basin: NRM Strategy
1992
1993
National Landcare Program Framework

Partnership Agreements
1994
COAG Water Reform Framework
1995
Wood and Paper Industries Strategy (including

commencement of the Regional Forest
Agreements processes)
1996
MurrayDarling Basin Sustainability Plan

National Strategy for the Conservation of
Australias Biodiversity
1997
COAG Heads of Agreement on Roles and

Responsibilities for Environment
Decade of Landcare Plan: National Overview
Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change
National Weeds Strategy
Nationally Agreed Criteria for the Establishment of a
Comprehensive Adequate and Representative Reserve
System for Forests in Australia
Natural Heritage Trust Partnership Agreements
Plantations 2020 Vision
Wetlands Policy of the Commonwealth Government
of Australia
Decade of Landcare Plan

Convention on Biological Diversity
Inter-governmental Agreement on the Environment
National Forest Policy Statement
National Strategy for Ecologically
Sustainable Development
United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change
1998
National Greenhouse Strategy
1999
Great Artesian Basin Sustainability Initiative

National Principles and Guidelines for
Rangeland Management
Conservation of Australian Species and Ecological
Communities Threatened with Extinction: A National
Strategy (ANZECC Working Document)
Feb 2000
National Framework for the Management and

Monitoring of Australias Native Vegetation
May 2000
UNCCD UN Convention to Combat Desertification
Queensland
Over the history of Queensland, the legislative and
policy emphasis, as it relates to natural resource
management, has shifted to a more formal
recognition of the need for sustainable land
management. While the early introduction of
conditions under which lands could be held was
aimed at the development and expansion of rural
industries, the continuation of leasehold tenure in
Queensland has allowed continued legislative
control of the conditions of occupation. Broadscale
tree clearing was first regulated for most leasehold
tenures through the Land Act 1962 (Qld), which
required permits for tree clearing. Although there
was increasing emphasis on conservation values, it
was not until several major amendments in the
early 1990s that real emphasis was placed on
sustainability within Queensland legislation (Fisher
& Walton 1996). Sustainability concepts are now
embodied in the Land Act 1994 (Qld), and in other
State legislation.
18
In a review of native vegetation management and

monitoring practices undertaken in August 1999,
five major pieces of Queensland legislation were
identified as important to native vegetation
management (Griffin nrm 1999):
Land Act 1994 (Qld)
Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Qld)
Water Resources Act 1989 (Qld)
Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld)
Rural Lands Protection Act 1985 (Qld).
Since the publication of that review, the Vegetation
Management Act 1999 (Qld), which has significant
implications for managing native vegetation on
freehold properties in Queensland, has been passed.
Under the Land Act 1994 (Qld), a lessee is required
to obtain a permit to clear trees on leasehold
properties (Land Act 1994 (Qld) Chapter 5, Part 6),
with specific exceptions (see s. 257). The Act
(s. 262) sets out matters that must be considered
when assessing an application for tree clearing.
These include local guidelines for broadscale tree
clearing approved by the Minister or, in the
absence of local guidelines, the contents of a
Broadscale Tree Clearing Policy (BTCP) approved by
the Governor in Council. Thirty-four local
guidelines for broadscale tree clearing were
approved in 1997. These were repealed in
December 1999 at the same time that a new BTCP
was approved. The new policy increased the level
of protection for regional ecosystems with an of
concern conservation status.
Legislative controls of clearing native vegetation
were recently extended to freehold land through the
Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld) which was
passed in December 1999, but at the time of
writing, had not yet been proclaimed. This Act
amends the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld) to
make clearing on freehold land a form of
assessable development for which approval is
required. Exemptions from requiring approval apply
to clearing in certain circumstances (Vegetation
Management Act 1999 (Qld) s. 84). These
exemptions include clearing of regrowth and
clearing or harvesting as part of a sustainable
forest management operation. Applications are
assessed for compliance with the requirements of
the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld) using an
assessment code that forms part of a regional
vegetation management plan approved by the
Minister (Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld)
Part 2 Division 3). If a relevant regional
management plan is not approved, an assessment
code that forms part of a State policy for vegetation
management is used. Note that under the Act
vegetation is defined as a native tree or a native
plant, other than a grass or mangrove (Vegetation
Management Act 1999 (Qld) s. 8 ).
Table 2.3 Summary of legislation affecting rural land use, development and management. Adapted from Hyam 1995;
Fisher and Walton 1996.
Act
Area of control affecting

land use/activity
Queensland
Aboriginal Land Act 1991 and Regulation
Provide for the grant, and the claim and grant, of land as
Aboriginal land and for other purposes
Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders (Land Holding) Act 1985

and Regulations
Titling and administration of traditional lands
Beach Protection Act 1968
Regulates land use and land management of Queensland beaches
Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995
Adds a planning dimension to the measures contained in the

Beach Protection Act 1968
Environment Protection Act 1994
Provides for the protection of the environment from a comprehensive

range of sources of environmental degradation in accordance with
the principles of ESD
Forestry Act 1959
Provides for the effective establishment and management of

forest lands in Queensland
Integrated Planning Act 1997
Provides a system whereby any development may be approved

anywhere in the State through a uniform process based on a
single application
Land Act 1994
Consolidates the law relating to the administration and

management of non-freehold land and the creation of freehold land
Mineral Resources Act 1989 and Regulations
An Act to encourage and regulate mining in Queensland
Native Title (Queensland) Act 1993
Mirrors Commonwealth legislation
Nature Conservation Act 1992
Provides for the management of protected areas and the conservation

of endangered species
Property Law Act 1974
An Act relating to the law of conveyancing of property
Queensland Heritage Act 1992
Provides for the conservation of the cultural heritage and environment of

Queensland
Rural Lands Protection Act 1985
Provides for the management and control of plants and animals affecting
rural land
Soil Conservation Act 1986
An Act that provides for the requirements for conservation of soil
Water Resources Act 1989
Provides for the construction and control of irrigation waters in Queensland
Commonwealth
Native Title Act 1993
Provides for circumstances in which native title has not been extinguished
at law
Under both the Broadscale Tree Clearing Policy for

Leasehold land and the Vegetation Management Act
1999 (Qld), a clearing application must be
accompanied by a tree management plan (for
leasehold land) or a property vegetation
management plan (PVMP) (for freehold land) which
details the type, area and location of vegetation
proposed to be cleared.
Other State legislation that controls the
management and monitoring of native vegetation
includes:
The Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Qld) which
provides for the issue of conservation orders on
any tenure in order to protect environmental and
conservation values, and provides for the
designation of an area as being of major interest
or critical value.
The Water Resources Act 1989 (Qld) imposes
controls over the clearing of beds and banks of
watercourses.
The Rural Lands Protection Act 1985 (Qld)
identifies exotic woody weed species that are to
be controlled and allows landholders to control
these species without first seeking tree clearing
permits, provided the overstorey trees are not
removed.
The Fisheries Act 1994 (Qld) provides that a

person must not remove, destroy or damage a
marine plant without a permit (s. 123). Burning
salt couch and pruning mangroves are used as
examples of unlawful damage. Grazing salt
couch could be construed as damage under this
definition. Marine plant is defined broadly, to
include a plant (a tidal plant) that usually grows
on, or adjacent to tidal land; whether it is living,
dead, standing or fallen; material of a tidal plant,
or other plant material on tidal land; a plant, or
material of a plant, prescribed under a regulation
or management plan to be a marine plant,
(s. 8(1)). This definition allows for plants
adjacent to tidal land, such as melaleuca forests
in freshwater wetlands contiguous with tidal
land, to come under the provisions of the
Fisheries Act 1994 (Qld), with respect to
vegetation disturbance.
Local government
Local governments may also regulate native
vegetation management through ordinances and
policy instruments that affect all tenures in urban
and peri-urban areas. For example, the Brisbane City
Council is progressively introducing a number of
planning and policy instruments to protect
19
vegetation: Vegetation Protection Ordinances (VPOs),

zoning controls and requirements, strengthening of
VPOs under the IPA, the Brisbane City Bushland
Acquisition Program and Community Partnerships.
2.4 Other legislation

There is a considerable body of legislation,
including planning law, which impacts upon, or
controls activities on rural land holdings (see table
2.3). A considerable proportion of this
contemporary legislation reflects developments in
environmental law, and embraces many of the
concepts of sustainability (see section 3.1
Ecologically sustainable development).
Native title issues

As discussed in section 2.1, on European
settlement in Australia, the Crown was deemed to
acquire radical title to all lands in the colony, and
absolute title to all uninhabited lands. However, the
High Court, in Mabo and Others v. Queensland
(No. 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1, held that not all land
rights derive from a Crown grant. A majority of the
Court held that the common law of Australia
recognises a form of native title to the land. Native
title is the recognition of rights, which are held by
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
according to their laws and customs. The common
law provides that the Crown could extinguish
native title by valid exercise of their sovereign
power by one of the following:
legislation
granting a tenure (such as private freehold)
which is inconsistent with the continued
existence of native title
using the land in a manner inconsistent with the
continued existence of native title.
In practice, native title is not an issue in respect of
valid private freehold grants, but is an issue that
must be assessed in respect of dealings involving
all other lands. Whether native title does, or does
not, survive on a given parcel is therefore a
question of fact, not of policy or discretion by
governments, and depends upon two main
considerations:
whether there has been a lawful extinguishment
of that title
whether the relevant Aboriginal or Torres Strait
Islander people have maintained a continuous
connection with the land.
The Australian Government gave a legislative
response to the Mabo decision by passing the
Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth). The objects of the
legislation were to:
validate past acts which may otherwise be
invalid due to the existence of native title
set the standards for future dealings with land
where native title exists
20
recognise and protect native title and provide for

its coexistence with land management systems
establish a mechanism for determining claims to
native title and for compensation where native
title has been extinguished or impaired by past
acts.
Following the commencement of the
Commonwealth Native Title Act, the High Court, in
Wik Peoples v. State of Queensland (1996) 141 ALR
129, held that the grant of a pastoral lease does not
necessarily extinguish native title and that pastoral
leases may coexist with native title. This decision
meant that native title might potentially coexist
over a large number of leasehold properties. The
Commonwealth responded with the passing of the
Native Title Amendment Act 1998.
Native title implications in respect of all dealings,
authorised or implemented by the Department of
Natural Resources, including tree clearing permits,
vegetation permits, sale of forest products and the
like, must be assessed with regard to the provisions
of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth). The Land Act
1994 (Qld) also makes provision for both native
title and cultural heritage values (see Part 3 for
native title and s. 262(2)(k) for cultural heritage
values) to be considered in assessing a treeclearing permit.
Cultural heritage values

Native title and cultural heritage are different, and
are protected by various pieces of legislation.
Cultural heritage values are independent of tenure
and may require conservation and management to
protect their cultural heritage significance. A draft
model for new legislation outlines possible ways to
protect cultural heritage as it relates to land and
water. The implications of the proposed legislation
with respect to native vegetation management are
potentially significant, but cannot be detailed until
the proposed legislation is forthcoming.
return to contents
National and international issues and their local impacts
Contributors
Ecologically sustainable development
Conservation of biological diversity
Rod Fensham, Environmental Protection Agency
Geoffrey T. Smith, Department of Natural Resources
Greenhouse effect
Beverley Henry, Department of Natural Resources
Lyn Allen, Department of Natural Resources
21
Summary
This section examines the national and
international issues of ecologically sustainable
development, biological diversity and the
greenhouse effect, as they relate to the management
of native vegetation. The issues are outlined in
general, together with local implications for native
vegetation management.
Ecologically sustainable development (ESD)
The concept of ESD is defined in the Bruntland
Report, as development that meets the needs of
the present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs. The
Commonwealth Government and the State
Governments have accepted ESD, leading to the
formulation of a National Strategy on ESD,
providing core objectives and guiding principles
across a broad range of issues.
There has been discussion as to whether the
strategy provides the necessary framework for
major institutional changes and changes in
current productionconsumption patterns.
Associated with this debate is the definition of
ESD itself, which has been criticised as being
limited in terms of its operational component, so
not providing for the aforementioned necessary
changes. Emphasis remains on the need for
meeting material wants and sustaining economic
growth, with biotic communities and ecosystems
being valued only incidentally.
Despite these problems of definition, ESD is the
stated primary objective of most land-use
management.
A National Strategy for Conservation of

Australias Biodiversity has been developed. In
Queensland, biodiversity conservation is
incorporated in planning and management
strategies at all government levels. Conservation
of regional ecosystems and their role as
surrogates for species is an important
component in biodiversity management and
protection strategies in Queensland. However,
comprehensive strategies plan and manage
biodiversity at a range of levels and scales.
Greenhouse effect
The warming of the earths atmosphere as a
result of the release of greenhouse gases such as
methane and carbon dioxide has increased over
the past 200 years, resulting in changing
temperature and rainfall patterns, and rising sea
levels.
The global response has been the signing of the
Kyoto Protocol, where countries made
commitments to reducing emissions to a certain
percentage below 1990 levels by 200812, with
Australias target being 108% growth on the
1990 emission level.
A review by the Productivity Commission in 1999

found that there is a lack of clarity in
Commonwealth departments and agencies as to
what constitutes ESD-related policy, a lack of
long-term focus, and failure to follow good
practice policy-making principles.
Australia is undertaking action through the

National Greenhouse Strategy (NGS), including
measures in relation to sinks, directed at
reducing land-based emissions and enhancing
sequestration in vegetation and agricultural soils.
In response to NGS, the Queensland Government
has also developed the Queensland
Implementation Plan (QIP).
The agricultural industry has developed a

number of sustainability indicators both at the
regional, national and on-farm levels. The
indicators are related to the profitability,
managerial skills and off-site impact of
agricultural land use, and the land and water
quality required to sustain production.
The Australian Greenhouse Office has initiated

calculations of land-based source and sinks in
the form of a National Greenhouse Gas Inventory
(NGGI). A significant component of this is the
Land Use Change and Forestry sector (LUCF),
which was responsible for approximately 20% of
Australias emissions in 1990.
Conservation of biological diversity
The Kyoto Protocol has provided for the concept

of carbon credits and carbon trading. Examples
of sinks that could generate carbon credits for
Queensland include conservation of forests from
clearing or logging, and agroforestry. However,
eligibility for carbon credits from restrictions in
land clearing is yet to be determined.
Biodiversity has been defined as the variety of

life in all its formsthe different plants, animals
and micro-organisms, the genes they contain
and the ecosystems or assemblages they form.
Traditionally, biodiversity has been considered on
the genetic, species and ecosystem level, but is
now also considered on the landscape level, in
recognition of the complex interactions that
occur across a landscape.
22
Biodiversity is crucial to maintaining a healthy

landscape, providing useful products and
maintaining critical ecosystem services such as
pollution breakdown and absorption, water
quality, pollination, natural pest control and
nutrient cycling. Natural biodiversity provides
ecosystems and landscape with resilience
against extreme (local) events.
3.1 Ecologically sustainable

development
What is ecologically sustainable
development?
In reporting on the state of the environment in
Australia, sustainable development was identified
as the central issue of our time (DEST 1996). With
both the environment and agriculture showing
signs of stress (Tothill & Gillies 1992; Industry
Commission 1998) the need for systems of
sustainable land use is generally agreed to be
paramount (eg: McIvor 1990b; Williams 1990;
Pickup & Stafford Smith 1993; Dovers & Norton,
1994a,b; Bishop et al. 1999). Concern for the
environmental impact of development globally has
led to international adoption of the notion of
ecologically sustainable development (ESD), which
seeks to integrate a range of environmental and
development issues. Determining the application of
this principle in practice is not straightforward, and
has implications for the retention and management
of native vegetation.
The notion of ESD has historical links to classical
economic theory, energy analysis and sustained
yield management modelling of indefinitely
renewable resources (eg: fisheries and forestry)
(Dovers & Norton 1994a,b; Callicott & Mumford
1997). The concept gained international acceptance
with the United Nations World Commission on
Environment and Development (the Bruntland
Commission) in 1987. The commissions report
outlined how governments might achieve the
objectives of economic development and
environmental protection, and interpreted ESD as
development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs (World
Commission on Environment and Development
1990). Following on from this initial report, a
number of international and national policy
documents have sought to further refine and
implement a global plan for sustainable
development. In 1992, the Australian Government
finalised its own National Strategy on Ecologically
Sustainable Development (NSESD) that was
subsequently endorsed by the Queensland
Government.
The core objectives of ecologically sustainable

development are:
to enhance individual and community wellbeing and welfare by following a path of
economic development that safeguards the
welfare of future generations
to provide for equity within and between
generations
to protect biological diversity and maintain
essential ecological processes and life-support
systems.
The guiding principles are:
Decision-making processes should effectively
integrate both long- and short-term economic,
environmental, social and equity
considerations.
Where there are threats of serious or
irreversible environmental damage, lack of full
scientific certainty should not be used as a
reason for postponing measures to prevent
environmental degradation.
The global dimension of environmental impacts
of actions and policies should be recognised
and considered.
The need to develop a strong, growing and
diversified economy which can enhance the
capacity for environmental protection should
be recognised.
The need to maintain and enhance
international competitiveness in an
environmentally sound manner should be
recognised.
Cost effectiveness and flexible policy
instruments such as improved valuation,
pricing and incentive mechanisms should be
adopted.
Decisions and actions should provide for broad
community involvement on issues which affect
them.
These guiding principles and core objectives need
to be considered as a package. No objective or
principle should predominate over the others. A
balanced approach that takes into account all
these objectives and principles is required to
pursue the goal of ESD.
The NSESD defines ESD as:

Using, conserving and enhancing the communitys
resources so that ecological processes, on which life
depends, are maintained and the total quality of life,
now and in the future, can be increased.
(Commonwealth of Australia 1992b)
Box 3.1 The core objectives and guiding principles from the
National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development
(Commonwealth of Australia 1992b).
23
The strategy provides core objectives, guiding

principles (see box 3.1) and a broad strategic
framework for key industry sectors across a broad
range of issues. It seeks to integrate economic,
social and environmental concerns and provide
protection to the community based on the notion of
intergenerational equity. At a State level, various
Queensland Acts include sustainable development
in their purpose (see section 2).
Economists Constanza and Daly (1992) present an
alternative perspective, distinguishing growth as
pushing more matterenergy through the
economy and development as squeezing more
human want satisfaction out of each unit of matter
energy that passes through. Economic growth
equates to increased throughput, and sustainable
economic development to increased efficiency.
However, Callicott and Mumford (1997) note that a
no-growth concept of ESD could also be achieved
by changing human wants to fewer material goods,
more amenities (clean air and water) and services
(education), which would improve profits and
create jobs. This shift would facilitate ESD less
through production efficiency, but more from a
demand-driven shift in the economy. In a
Commonwealth inquiry into ecologically
sustainable land management, the Industry
Commission (1998) similarly identified the absence
or poor functioning of markets for key natural
resources (i.e. water, farm forestry, native flora and
fauna) and recommended improvement of these
markets (e.g. tradeable rights to water, separate
tenure for land and trees). CSIRO research in north
Australia, is identifying improved markets for
clean, green agriculture, to demonstrate the
economic benefits of creating a niche market for
sustainable agriculture.
Sustainability can be simply defined as the ability
to maintain something undiminished over some
time (Callicott & Mumford 1997). Based on this
definition, Callicott and Mumford (1997) argue that
definitions need to be reconstructed bearing in
mind the inapplicability of the sustained yield
notion to most natural resources, which are
vulnerable to risks other than over-harvesting
(e.g. land degradation).
Principles, assessment and indicators

While a useful definition of ESD can be debated ad
infinitum, other authors have circumvented these
difficulties by focusing on determining principles,
assessment procedures (Bosshard 2000) and
indicators of sustainability (Dove 1997). There are
a number of guiding principles that are generally
accepted within the literature. Common elements of
approaches to sustainable land-use planning
include:
identifying the best combination of sustainable
land uses for an area
24
consideration of the whole property as an

integral part of the geomorphic (hydrological and
ecological) processes (landscape) of which it is
part (eg: McIvor 1990b; Williams 1990; Pickup &
Stafford Smith 1993; Dovers & Norton 1994a,b;
Lefroy & Hobbs 1998; McIvor & MacLeod 1999;
McIntyre et al. 2000; Simpson & Whalley 1999)
promotion of better environmental outcomes,
(e.g. improved soil fertility, health and structure,
protection of biodiversity and ecosystem
amenities, reduction of erosion, salinity).
It is generally acknowledged that in order to put
sustainability into practice, land managers and
developers need to acknowledge that the current
environment is the result of three factors:
evolutionary history (millions of years) including
that of historic and prehistoric humans
biophysical parameters and processes (soil,
climate, nutrient cycling)
management parameters (percentage developed,
grazing type and pressure).
It is important to distinguish between these
evolutionary and biophysical factors as they must
be planned for in management strategies, so that
management factors can then be adjusted in order
to meet sustainability goals.
In the context of the grazing ecosystem,
sustainability would require land use to take place
in an ecologically conservative fashion, within
apparently safe limits that have been determined by
an integrated assessment of current and potential
threats (Dovers & Norton 1994a). In the absence of
sufficient ecological information, sustainability
includes the adoption of the precautionary
approach to environmental issues. The
precautionary principle requires that if the full
impact of a decision is unknown and the
consequences of that decision are irreversible, then
that decision should not be made.
A recent Australian workshop explored the
modelling of sustainable agriculture on natural
ecosystems. In addition to production, the
conservation of land and water and to a certain
degree, biodiversity, is an outcome of the
agricultural system, rather than an ameliorating
afterthought (Lefroy & Hobbs 1998). Production is
designed using ecological assemblages based on
proportional representation of functional groups
(cf. taxonomic, biogeographic or aesthetic groups)
found in nature. As this does not necessarily mean
local, indigenous species, care must be taken to
avoid using scenarios where weeds may become a
problem. In determining the level of biodiversity to
be imitated, the existing biota must be looked at in
evolutionary terms. The difficulty in this approach
is the ability to retain mutualistic or cooperative
functions that are generally lost in intensively
managed systems, and social and economic
constraints such as the slow rate of adoption by
Table 3.1 Sustainability indicators for agriculture (Dove 1997).

Regional/national indicators
On-farm indicators
Profitability
Net farm income

Equity
Productivity
Term of trade
Disposable income per household

Non-farm income
Farm operating surplus as % land value
Farm income per hectare per 100 mm growing season rainfall
Operating costs as % land value
Land value per household
Machinery value as % of farm income
Farm income per farm labour unit
Financing costs as % total income
Return on capital
Land and water quality

to sustain production
Water use efficiency

Nutrient balance
Enterprise diversity
Native vegetation
Rangeland condition
Change in area of productive
agricultural land
Water use efficiency

Acidification
Organic matter (Organic C%)
Exchangeable sodium (Exch. Na %)
Soil erosion
Managerial skills
Farmer education level

Participation rate
Implementation of sustainable
management practices
Financial
Administration
Risk management
Land
Machinery
Staff management
People skills
Crop and pasture production
Livestock production
Succession plan
Marketing
Farm safety
Off-site environmental impacts Chemical residues in

agricultural produce
Salinity in streams
Dust storm frequency
Length of contact zone
with conservation areas
Salinity of water leaving farm/district

Nutrient in water leaving farm/district
Health of livestock leaving farm/district
Health of plants leaving farm/district
landholders (Lefroy & Hobbs 1998). Dawson and

Fry (1998) assert that to be successful, such a
model needs to be based on scientific
understanding, to mimic the natural variability
found at farm and landscape scale and to be
designed within an adoption framework.
developed under the following broad categories

developed by SCARM:
profitability (reflected by long-term, real, net
farm income)
land and water quality to sustain production
managerial skills
off-site environmental impacts (Dove 1997).
McIntyre et al. (2000) have formulated a set of

principles for sustainable management for grazing
in subtropical woodlands. The principles
incorporate ecological indicators for grazing
properties relating to soils, pastures, trees and
wildlife. For some of these principles, thresholds
were determined. Pickup and Stafford Smith (1993)
suggest an assessment process that is a stepwise,
iterative application of procedure to determine
economic viability, ecological adequacy and social
feasibility. While they acknowledge that the
application is somewhat daunting, they suggest the
process is valuable in providing a basis for
application based on current local knowledge, and
identifies many critical research issues. Dovers and
Norton (1994a,b) have also suggested criteria for
assessing sustainability based on an ecological
framework.
Some authors have attempted to describe regional
and on-farm indicators of sustainability. For
example, table 3.1 details a set of indicators
King et al. (in prep) described the work in Australia

on sustainability indicators as an industry of its
own. They identify a number of reasons why use
by farmers is limited, such as measurements being
meaningless to landholders, production agriculture
being viewed as separate to conservation
agriculture, the theoretical nature of indicators, lack
of enthusiasm by farmers in measuring degradation
of their own farms, the threatening nature of the
subject of land conservation, monitoring being
perceived as negative by farmers, and the
perception by farmers that they are being assessed.
Key findings of this study were:
that the knowledge of farmers in developing
indicators has been largely ignored
there are links between indicators used by farmers
and those developed through traditional science
off-farm indicators used by farmers may be
useful in policy development.
25
Pickup and Stafford Smith (1993) have identified

the following difficulties in prescribing guidelines
for sustainable land use:
the scale at which properties are managed
the variability of influencing factors
lack of research information to provide
conceptual models
lack of effective techniques for measuring and
combatting land degradation
a failure by bureaucracies to transmit a
consistent message to landholders
land managers lacking the tools to help with
making decisions at the property scale.
Where principles are recommended, adoption of
these practices by landholders may be limited by
the following:
character of the land
economic constraints
available technology
legal aspects of land use
land tenure and management
production-focused government policies as
opposed to those that focus on the sustainability
or fate of individuals (Hollick 1995)
historical or cultural aspects.
In 1999, an inquiry was conducted to examine the
progress of Commonwealth departments and
agencies in incorporating ESD into their policy,
decision-making processes, and day-to-day
operations (Productivity Commission 2000). The
overall progress of ESD implementation has been
variable, with the best examples in natural resource
management. The major impediments for
implementation were identified as being the lack of
clarity regarding what constitutes ESD-related
policies, failure to follow good practice policymaking principles, lack of long-term focus and
often lack of tools to assist in policy making. Many
organizations regarded ESD as relating solely to
environmental issues, when in fact it has a broader
scope, including factors such as externalities and
open access resources with undefined property
rights (Productivity Commission 2000). The inquiry
recommended that improvement of ESD
implementation could be achieved by focusing on
improving the practices of policy making within
departments and agencies, improving coordination
between agencies and other stakeholders,
undertaking regular monitoring and review of policy
initiatives, encouraging longer term strategic
thinking and developing a longer-term commitment
to monitoring environmental indicators
(Productivity Commission 2000).
The current Queensland framework and the

implications for land managers
Despite the difficulties in defining sustainability as
outlined above, the notion has become a common
objective of natural resource management (Noss
26
1983; McIvor 1990b; Dovers & Norton 1994;

ANZECC and ARMCANZ 1999). For many
researchers and managers, the primary objective is
still the need to optimise production, although
there is some acknowledgment that management
trade-offs are paramount in preventing irreversible
land degradation (McIvor 1990b; Pickup & Stafford
Smith 1993; McIntyre et al. 2000). Other authors
consider that sustaining biodiversity should be the
primary concern of sustainability (Noss 1983;
Dovers & Norton 1994a; Dovers & Norton 1994b;
Callicott & Mumford 1997; Callicott et al. 1999).
Their broad interpretation of ecological
sustainability for biological conservation involves
converting natural resources (efficiently) into a
commercial commodity without running down the
natural capital (i.e. biodiversity, and
consequentially ecological services and function)
beyond the degradation threshold (Tilman 1999b).
James et al. (1999) offer an economic costs
scenario likely to ensure the persistence of
biodiversity. Their analysis explores the costs in
setting aside areas for restricted use, and in fencing
other areas for exclusion. They assert that this is a
modest investment in sustaining biodiversity. Their
purpose was to explore ways in which production
could (more or less) continue while biodiversity
protection was implemented.
Decisions about what proportion of a property to
develop in the rural context make up part of the
management parameters of sustainability. A great
deal of debate about the appropriate amount of
vegetation to retain on properties gives rise to
guidelines of between 20%4and 34% (Burrows et
al. 1988b; Walpole 1999; McIntyre et al. 2000) for
various vegetation types and for various purposes
(wildlife habitat, shade and shelter, nutrient
recycling and erosion control) as part of
sustainable property management. The tree
clearing guidelines determined by the Vegetation
Management Act 1999 (Qld) and the Land Act 1994
(Qld) provide for a vegetation management
framework, while the stated purpose includes
allowing for ecologically sustainable land use
(Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld) S 3.1 (e)).
Based on the above analysis, conservation of
regional vegetation diversity alone cannot address
all facets of sustainable property management, and
must be included with a wider interpretation of
sustainable management. Statewide reductions in
clearing to achieve biodiversity outcomes will have
short-term and long-term economic consequences,
and part of the challenge of sustainability is
ensuring the economic viability of landholders. The
challenge in implementing this legislation is
marrying the short-term profitability of the
property with the long-term goal of sustainability,
and in this way incorporating sustainability of
biodiversity with sustainable property management.
3.2 Conservation of biological

diversity
Biological diversity: definition and values
Biological diversity, or biodiversity, refers to the
variety of life in all its formsthe different plants,
animals and micro-organisms, the genes they
contain and the ecosystems or assemblages they
form. Traditionally, biological diversity is considered
at three different levels: genetic, species and
ecosystem (Commonwealth of Australia 1993).
However, biodiversity is also defined in relation to
environmental and ecological distinctiveness and
the complex interactions that occur across a
landscape. The regional landscape level of
biological diversity is now well accepted (Noss
1990; Sattler 1993a) and is recognised in the Nature
Conservation Act 1992 (Qld).
Humans are dependent on biological systems and
processes, and derive their food, many medicines
and industrial products from both wild and
domesticated components of biological diversity.
This diversity also underpins and sustains
functions important to maintaining a healthy
landscape. This functional role of biological
diversity, and the suite of processes that make up
the complex interacting system of the earth
according to how it supports humans, have been
collectively referred to as ecosystem services (e.g.
Daily 1997). These services are such pervasive
features of the environment that they are often
assumed to be constant until they break down or
become depleted (Mooney & Ehrlich 1997). Indeed,
it is the global extent of emerging land degradation,
poor quality surface water and declining wild
stocks that have focused international attention on
the functional roles of biodiversity (Baskin 1994,
Baskin 1997, Daily 1997).
What ecosystem services might include

Ecosystem services operate at a variety of scales,
from global to local. Delineating the boundaries of
connected processes is difficult, if not impossible.
Examples at a local level include the role of bird
fauna in maintaining insect populations at levels
low enough to prevent defoliation and associated
dieback of eucalypts in northern New South Wales
and Victoria (Ford 1990; Loyn 1987), and native
ants improving recruitment of grass species in the
Mitchell Grass Downs region (Phelps & Phelps
1999). Other examples of global services provided
by biodiversity include pollution breakdown and
absorption, soil formation, nutrient cycling,
recovery from unpredictable events, contribution to
climate stability and protection of water resources
(table 3.2).
Does biodiversity matter to ecosystem

services?
The importance of biodiversity to the functioning of
ecosystems has been identified by a number of
authors (e.g. Daily 1997; Naeem 1998). Biological
diversity can be measured by assigning organisms
to functional groups by trophic level, guild and
other ecosystem roles or outputs (Naeem 1998).
These groups are arguably of greater importance in
determining the role of biodiversity in providing
ecosystem services than in the identity of their
component species (Ewel et al. 1991; Ewel 1986).
Four conclusions emerge from theoretical modelling
and field research on the role of biodiversity in
ecosystem function. They are:
1. Species richness adds to the net ecosystem
productivity up to a (small) number of species,
beyond which the level of productivity remains
fairly constant (Tilman et al. 1996; Tilman 1997).
Productivity increases more with diversity of
functional groups than with increases in
randomly selected species because of the
importance of complimentary niche roles and the
interactions among selected species (Loreau
1998; Hector et al. 1999).
2. Resilience to the impact of extreme (local) events
is enhanced by greater regional biodiversity, as
the functional short-fall on the loss of
individual species can be filled by other species,
and so biodiversity has an element of
redundancy (Naeem 1998). Greater (regional)
species richness is an insurance against the
impact of extreme (local) events (Yachi & Loreau
1999; Petchey et al. 1999; Hector et al. 1999;
Tilman 1999a).
3. Local extinctions or reduction in biomass (within
functional groups) can trigger loss of ecosystem
functions, degradation or collapse and the
transition and run-down to a new equilibrium
with a lower level of productivity (Westoby 1989,
Ash et al. 1997; Tothill & Gillies 1992).
4. Simplified human-managed ecosystems are
efficient producers of target products, but tend to
be inefficient with regard to such services as
maintenance of soil fertility (i.e. losing soil,
nutrients and water) (Baskin 1997; Paoletti et al.
1992).
Diversity can be increased by the introduction of
exotics, although it may increase only temporarily
beyond that of the natural ecosystem after which it
can decline, depending on the competitive
advantage of the exotic species. Australias species
richness has increased by >2700 alien plants (Low
1999), including many useful to agricultural
production (Bridgewater 1990; Tothill & Hacker
1996), yet few would argue that this has been
entirely beneficial (EPA 1999c).
27
Table 3.2 Categories of ecosystem services derived from biodiversity.

Ecosystem service
Details
Global
Atmospheric composition and climate
Plants play an integral role in atmospheric cycling through photosynthesis, respiration and
transpiration (See section 3.3 Greenhouse effect).
Local patterns of precipitation and temperature effects may include proximity to the ocean,
topography and vegetation cover (Meyer-Homji 1992; Smith 1994; Smith et al. 1992;
Williams 1991).
Sustained reduction of rainfall following clearing, based on loss of function of vegetation cover
to water balance regulation through increasing the height of the planetary boundary layer,
heat fluxes, evapotranspiration (Lyons et al. 1993) and release of aerosols demonstrated in the
Western Australian wheatbelt (Chambers 1998).
Cycling of water, nutrients and

atmospheric chemical elements
Cycled essential elements include carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium,

manganese, calcium, sulphur and sodium.
Living organisms make a major contribution to rendering these and other nutrients available as
organic compounds or soluble ions.
The same processes and the chemical attributes of the biosphere are essential to water and
air purification (Daily et al. 1997).
Genetic library
Provision of a gene pool contributes both directly (medicine, food, resilience to disease and
pests) and indirectly (continuation of evolutionary processes).
Regional and local processes

Natural resources/production inputs
Plants concentrate nutrients and other complex molecules required from inorganic sources,
which consumer organisms generally are not capable of synthesising (Dorit et al. 1991).
Non-food resources supplied by ecosystems include fossil fuel, timber, paper, fibre for textiles,
chemicals for industry and pharmaceuticals.
Soil formation, fertility and retention
Living decomposers turn dead organic matter, including potentially toxic plant products, to
inorganic ions and humus, aiding soil structure, pore size, ped formation, nutrient store and
buffering the soil against pH changes (White 1997b).
Some bacteria fix nitrogen from the atmosphere, while symbiotic mycorrhizal fungi improve
the ability of plants to utilise soil nutrients.
Larger organisms bury and process organic wastes, improving the structure of the soil.
(Baskin 1997; Daily et al. 1997).
Pollination and dispersal of plants
Worldwide, 91% of flowering plants are pollinated by animals, 8.3% are pollinated by wind or
are self fertile and 0.06% are dispersed by water (Nabhan & Buchmann 1997)
Pollination and seed dispersal are frequently mediated by animals (e.g. bats, insects and birds)
in Australia. (Specht & Specht 1999)
Natural pest control
Herbivorous and wood-boring insects are preyed upon by predatory insects, spiders (Reichert
& Bishop 1990; Reichert & Lockley 1984; De Barro 1992), insectivorous birds, micro bats
and reptiles (Davidson and Davidson 1992).
Intensive agriculture that has displaced natural systems entirely or that introduces massive
disturbance through the use of pesticides that attack non target (beneficial) species are very
vulnerable to pest damage (Carson, 1962; Pimental & Greiner 1997).
Hydrology and flood control
Vegetation can determine whether rainfall contributes to evapotranspiration and interception,

soil surface evaporation, root zone storage, run-off and deep drainage (to groundwater)
(White 1997b; Meyers 1996; DNR 1997).
The control exerted over hydrology by percent cover and deep rooted perennial vegetation has
been evidenced in Australia in shorter and higher flood hydrographs and rising groundwater
tables (Hobbs & Hopkins 1990).
Bioremediation
Wetlands vegetation (from unicellular algae to macrophytes that float or are anchored) in
particular have been demonstrated to purify water (Sainty et al. 1994)
Efficient and/or hardy species from natural functional groups can be recruited (and bred) for
use in particular tasks such as treatment of urban run-off and natural processing of waste
products such as leachate and mining tailings (Sainty, et al. 1994).
Threats to ecosystem functioning

The complete replacement of the life support
functions of the biosphere with a synthetic
analogue is a technical impossibility. Even the
small-scale experiment Biosphere 2 (Marino &
Odum 1999; Alling et al. 2000) demonstrated the
difficulty, or futility, of building a self-perpetuating
functioning ecology on a planetary scale. But noone is proposing to eliminate the entire biosphere.
Rather, rising human population, falling terms of
trade and concern for the future drive attempts to
increase the efficiency of resource use while
limiting further degradation. Agricultural
efficiencies can be raised in terms of yield/ha (if
not yield/input) with the application of modern
28
technology. The challenge is to improve economic

production and halt or reverse degradation.
Identifying threats to ecosystem functioning,
predicting outcomes and assessing risk is difficult.
When does a phenomenon constitute a degrading
process or a temporary disturbance? How should
biodiversity be managed in order to maintain the
resilience that permits an ecosystem or
agroecosystem to recover from a disturbance?
(Sousa 1984). Cause and effect can be separated by
kilometres (e.g. down a river) or generations into
the future, complicated by lag effects and feedback
mechanisms (see for example section 4.2.8
Salinity). However, environmental modelling,
together with appropriate survey capability can
contribute to regional and catchment-level risk

assessments. For example, a limited risk
assessment for survival of selected (rare) species in
the aquatic ecosystems of the Fitzroy basin has
been made as part of the Water Allocation
Management Planning (WAMP) process (DNR
1998b). However, extinctions of individual species
are only the final outcome of prolonged or
profound degradation (Recher 1999). Function loss
may arise once a species or functional group
declines or becomes an extinct keystone species
(Krebs 1994; Mooney & Ehrlich 1997). Ecosystems
dont need to collapse entirely to impact on the
quality of ecosystem services or productivity
(Hobbs & Hopkins 1990).
More intense agroecosystems tend to be less
complex than the natural ecosystems they replace.
These simplified systems are efficient in terms of a
target product but may lack the resilience or
buffering effect of native ecosystems. Monocultures
can be efficient and yet vulnerable to extreme
weather events and disease. Extensive land use, or
utilisation of native vegetation for grazing or
forestry varies in impact, depending on stocking
rates and grazing management or harvesting
regime (Wilson 1990). Further, it is possible to use
non-indigenous plants and animals to satisfy
production as well as performing certain ecological
services, although this is often imperfect (see also
section 3.1). Adaptations to highly local conditions
are often seen to be optimal, however, the functions
and efficiencies of local species and communities
are also limited to natural variety and evolution. In
deciding ideal levels of management in terms of
replacing or adding species, continued delivery of
ecosystem services should be an integral aim at
paddock, landscape and catchment scales. The
recognition that ecosystems respond to sustained
disturbance in a non-linear fashion has focused
attention on thresholds (McIntyre et al. 2000).
Cumulative incremental losses can degrade
ecosystem function (Saunders et al. 1991). If
threatening processes persist and/or interact,
steady states can be pushed or suddenly degraded
to a point where productivity is permanently
reduced to a new equilibrium. By identifying
thresholds, management can seek to stay within
safe limits to avoid collapses or losses of function.
The species of naturally occurring communities are
a moveable feast, changing over time with
invasions and other disturbances and shifts such as
climate change. Others have argued that species
are positioned along environmental gradients,
fulfilling particular or general ecological functions
regardless of their taxonomy or that of their
neighbours. Some geographic areas will perform at
less than maximum ecological efficiency, defined as
biomass production, if a functional group is poorly
or not represented. For example, pasture
production can be increased in north Queensland
by the addition of vigorous exotic legumes.

However, such successful introductions can initiate
a one-way directional shift. Legumes can change
environmental parameters such as pH
(acidification) and increase soil nitrogen (Cregan &
Scott 1998; Noble et al. 1997).
Agroecosystem design, development and
management will benefit from the strategic
retention of trees or regional ecosystems and the
use of ecological analogues in pastoral and
cropping systems. Future shocks and directional
shifts can be expected from sources such as global
climate change and outbreaks of weeds and
diseases. Intact native biota can be seen as a buffer
against rapid (detrimental) change and as a source
of genetic resources.
Strategies for conservation of biodiversity

At an international level, the Convention on
Biological Diversity sets out the broad guidelines
and outcomes necessary for the conservation of
biodiversity. This convention was ratified by
Australia in 1996. Within Australia, biodiversity
conservation principles were incorporated into the
development of ecologically sustainable
development strategies (e.g. Commonwealth of
Australia 1992b). Subsequently, a National Strategy
for the Conservation of Australias Biological
Diversity has been developed and has been
accepted by the Commonwealth, State and Territory
governments (ANZECC 1993). This strategy sets
out broad directions covering a range of
substrategies and programs such as the National
Forest Policy, the National Reserve System, National
Heritage Trust Programs and treaties such as the
Japan Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (JAMBA)
and others listed in table 2.2.
In Queensland, there is no overarching State-wide
strategy for the protection of biodiversity. However,
biodiversity conservation is a component of a range
of planning and management strategies covering a
range of regions and levels of detail and
government. Examples include catchment, local
government, landcare, bushcare and property
plans, and regional planning initiatives such as the
South West Strategy (Williams 1995), Water
Allocation Management Plans (WAMPS), the
developing Nature Conservation Strategy for SouthEast Queensland 2001-06 and the SEQ Regional
Coastal Management Plan process.
Most strategies and plans emphasise the need to
take a regional approach to maximise the
effectiveness of actions required to manage
biodiversity. Sattler and Williams (1999) set out a
framework for bioregional planning in Queensland
that describes landscapes across the State, based
on climate, geology, landform, soils and vegetation,
providing a relevant context for assessing and
prioritising biodiversity. The development of
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) allows this
29
bioregional framework to be applied to those

regional planning processes using boundaries
based on varying criteria (e.g. local government
or catchment).
In practice, all the strategies mentioned previously
address biodiversity at one or all of the levels at
which it is recognisedthe genetic, species,
ecosystem and landscape levels. The different levels
of biodiversity and examples of their management
strategies in Queensland are:
Genetic level
Protecting species and communities across their
geographical range maximises the protection of
their gene pool and takes into account both the
extent of genetic variation, and its geographical
distribution. During the last decade, much attention
has been paid to the importance of population
genetics (Ellstrand 1992; Storfer 1996), because
fragmentation of the landscape has caused a
decrease in population size and density, which can
then result in the erosion of a species genetic
diversity. For many species there is a lack of the
critical data on the spatial organisation of genetic
variability and on critical population genetic factors
such as gene flow, inbreeding levels and effective
population size, which is necessary to manage the
landscape at this level.
Species level
At the species level, the emphasis is on saving
elements of biodiversity that can then be managed
in conjunction with higher levels. Rare and
threatened species projects (bridled nailtail wallaby,
hairy-nosed wombat, golden shouldered parrot and
bilby) are examples of species-level planning and
management where individual species are
prioritised and managed, sometimes through
species recovery plans (Reville 1992). The
management of these and other species with
particular management requirements or commercial
uses (e.g. macropods, crocodiles, and waterfowl),
can also be addressed by the preparation and
implementation of Conservation Plans under the
Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Qld).
Ecosystem level
This level emphasises protecting ecosystems as
important in their own right (e.g. wetlands and
rainforest) and recognises their associated
functions, such as the role wetlands play in
nutrient cycling and absorption and in the
hydrological cycle. It also recognises that species
will not be adequately protected without
conserving their habitat (e.g. Nature Conservation Act
1992 (Qld); ANZECC 1993; ANZECC-MCFFA 1995).
Ecosystems are also often assumed to act as
surrogates for other levels of biodiversity. In other
words, protecting and managing regional
ecosystems will protect and manage their
associated species and genetic components.
30
Examples of ecosystem-level planning and

management are the definition and prioritisation of
regional ecosystems based on conservation status,
which has been incorporated into State-wide tree
clearing guidelines and the Regional Forest
Agreement process in south-east Queensland (and
elsewhere in Australia).
Landscape level
This level attempts to bring together the other
levels and emphasises the complex ecological
structure, functioning and processes of the different
components of biodiversity. Scale is also an
important aspect of landscape considerations. For
example, a wheat paddock that displaces most of
the native species from an area cannot be
considered sustainable with respect to biodiversity
conservation at a paddock scale, but could readily
be a part of a landscape where biodiversity is
sustainably protected at a regional scale. Another
example is that a species or ecosystem that is
abundant across the Brigalow Belt bioregion as a
whole, may be considered threatened at a
subregional province level.
Examples of landscape-level planning and
management are the development of regional
vegetation management strategies and property
plans that incorporate concepts such as the size
and relative placement of remnant ecosystems,
provision of wildlife corridors and special
management of areas that act as wildlife refuges.
An adequate reserve system where management is
specifically directed to conservation is also an
essential part of a landscape-scale strategy for the
protection of biodiversity. Conservation reserves in
Queensland total about 6 800 000 ha or 4% of the
State and provide the foundation for the protection
of biodiversity. Unfortunately, a reserve-based
strategy will not be sufficient to conserve
biodiversity (Recher & Lim 1990; Nix 1993; Kitching
1994). Many plants and animals will be dependent,
not only upon the habitat contained within the
boundaries of a protected area, but also upon its
landscape setting. Most birds, for example, need to
be able to exploit resources as they become
available over a large area. Furthermore, the
impending likelihood of accelerated climate change
accentuates the necessity for a well-connected
natural landscape. The range of many eucalypts is
determined by climate and yet they are extremely
poorly dispersed. If the habitat for immobile species
were restricted to isolated reserves, many species
would become extinct as they became trapped in
unfavourable habitat as the climate changed. Clearly
the reserve system needs to be complemented by
facilitating pro-active management of other lands to
protect biodiversity. This may be partially achieved
through voluntary conservation agreements, but is
likely also to require a legislative framework and
importantly, financial incentives (in a variety of
forms) to protect threatened ecosystems
(Young et al. 1996). Careful integration of

conservation and primary production land uses can
benefit landholders, the wider community and
wildlife (Harrington 1990, Nix 1993).
Biodiversity values of non-remnant

woody vegetation
There are numerous examples of areas of nonremnant vegetation (which include thinned,
regrowth or highly disturbed areas) that have a
floristic and faunal diversity value higher than that
in adjacent cleared areas, although not generally as
high as in remnant areas. Dorricott et al. (1997)
found that thinned or regrowth brigalow woodland
areas were associated with relatively high faunal
species richness and, in one case, a higher number
of fauna species than in nearby unmodified,
ungrazed areas of similar vegetation. Thinned
brigalow woodlands in New South Wales have also
been shown to be associated with almost as many
native fauna species as adjacent uncleared brigalow
woodland (Ellis & Wilson 1992). In the Mulga Lands
bioregion, thinning mulga trees, combined with
appropriate follow-up management (Pressland
1976b) has the potential to restore microheterogeneity, re-establish critical functioning and
create a diverse system (Tongway & Ludwig 1995)
and therefore to be compatible with conservation
objectives (Cameron & Blick 1991).
There is little data available on the development of
the structure and floristic composition of regrowth
vegetation over time. Johnson (1997) has shown
that cleared brigalow communities near Theodore
may be able to return to communities similar in
structure and floristics to untouched stands,
although the transition may take more than
50 years. Thus, while regrowth areas are not an
immediate substitute for remnant habitat, they
could provide an effective source for long-term
habitat restoration.
It is important to distinguish between the impact of
clearing and the conservation value of regrowth
vegetation, given the above and the associated
impact of introducing exotic pasture species that
often accompanies clearing. In a study comparing
floristic diversity of remnant, cleared/no exotic
pasture introduction, and cleared/exotic pasture
vegetation, Fairfax and Fensham (2000) found that
floristic diversity was highest in the remnants even
when exotic species were present. The floristic
diversity in cleared/no exotic pasture was slightly
lower, but was significantly lower in adjacent areas
where clearing was accompanied by the
introduction of improved pastures. McIvor (1998)
has also shown that the introduction of exotic
species and cultivation is associated with a
significant reduction in the density and total number
of native plant species in northern Queensland.
3.3 Greenhouse effect

Background
Over the last 200 years, the heavy burning of fossil
fuels in conjunction with the clearing of forests and
other native vegetation for agriculture, and the
release of soil carbon to the atmosphere as carbon
dioxide from intensive use of the soil, has created a
heavy imbalance in the global carbon cycle. Each
year, as much as 6000 Mt/year of carbon dioxide is
being released into the atmosphere. Oceans,
terrestrial vegetation and soils absorb about half of
this, leaving the rest to build up in the atmosphere.
The global warming caused by increased
greenhouse gases results in changes in temperature
and rainfall patterns, as well as rising sea levels
(Rawson & Murphy 1999).
Australias vegetation is already fairly well adapted
to significant climatic variability, primarily as a
result of the El Nio Southern Oscillation (ENSO).
While impacts on vegetation resulting from
greenhouse changes may be very difficult to
differentiate from those due to ENSO variability,
modelling suggests increased carbon dioxide loads
may result in an increased frequency of ENSO
events, with the average cycle falling from
5 to 3 years (Wollast & McKenzie 1989).
Rawson and Murphy (1999) have identified a
number of potential distinctions for Australian
ecosystems:
an increased occurrence of droughts/floods, or
greater climatic variability that may lead to
further stresses in small populations and
possible extinctions
climatic change resulting in alterations to the
competitive interactions of species. For example,
increased rainfall could lead to species better
adapted to wetter areas invading or gaining
advantage over species adapted to drier
environments
increased carbon dioxide concentrations in the
atmosphere will favour some species over others
depending on which photosynthetic pathway
they utilise
the available water for plant growth, which will
influence species distribution, will be dependent
on the new climate and the water-holding
capacity of the soil in new locations
changes in plant productivity and interaction
with grazing may threaten some species
fragmentation will make migration of species
more difficult.
Higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
will tend to enhance the growth of vegetation,
however, some plants do not respond to this excess
as much as others. It is likely that those species
that respond well to higher concentrations of
carbon dioxide will increase their ranges by
migration. Little is known about the specific
responses of most native plants in Australia
31
(AGO 1998a). In a review of the ability of models to

calculate the impact of climate change on
Queensland grazing lands, Hall et al. (1998)
demonstrated considerable variation in impacts
between regions. Models developed in the study
showed that more complex variation was to be
expected when regional climate change scenarios
were evaluated in combination with varying soil
and pasture parameters.
Global response
Increasing international concern about the
implications of climatic change and recognition that
a global response was required to solve a global
environmental problem resulted in the drafting of
the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC). Under the Kyoto
Protocol to the UNFCCC, negotiated in 1997,
developed countries have agreed to potentially
legally binding targets of reduced greenhouse gas
emissions as a whole, to 5% below 1990 levels by
2008-12. Developing countries have been assigned
differentiated emissions reduction or limitation
targets that reflect differing economies and
capacities for reduction. As a signatory to the
UNFCCC, Australia has an obligation to produce a
national inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and
removals and to implement appropriate greenhouse
response measures to limit emissions. Should the
protocol be enforced, Australia will be required to
limit growth in greenhouse gas emissions to 8%
above 1990 levels by the first commitment period
200812.
Articles 3.3, 3.4 and 3.7 provide a framework for
dealing with greenhouse gas sinks.
Article 3.3 provides that sink activities counted
towards the first commitment period are confined
to afforestation, reforestation and deforestation
since 1990. Forests established since 1990 are
recognised as sinks, while deforestation since
1990 must be recognised as an emission. Growth
between 1990 and 2008 in eligible forests cannot
be counted, although afforestation and
deforestation will need to be implemented prior
to 2008 to allow for lag effects, since it takes
time to establish a new forest and growth rates
often peak many years after planting.
32
Article 3.4 establishes a process for negotiating

additional sink activities that may apply in the
first commitment period and must be applied in
subsequent periods. While an agreement on
allowable additional activities is subject to
further considerable domestic and international
policy debate, there may yet be incentives for
other vegetation retention or enhancement. Some
additional human-induced activities in the landuse change and forestry and agricultural soils
categories, may be negotiated for inclusion for
the first commitment period, provided they have
taken place since 1990. Examples of activities
that may be included are conservation of native

vegetation, revegetation activities not meeting the
definitional requirements for afforestation or
reforestation under Article 3.3, management to
increase carbon storage in forests, enhanced
carbon storage in agricultural soils through
management practices such as reduced tillage,
increased residue inputs and management of
stocking intensity.
Article 3.7 provides for countries for which net
emissions from Land Use Change and Forestry
(LUCF) was a net source in 1990, to include the
net emissions from land use change in the
baseline. This is the so-called Australia clause.
Australia is undertaking action to address
greenhouse issues through the National
Greenhouse Strategy (NGS) including measures in
relation to sinks directed at reducing land-based
emissions, enhancing sequestration in vegetation
and agricultural soils and improving understanding
of carbon fluxes and measurement capacity in the
terrestrial biosphere. The Queensland
Implementation Plan (QIP), developed by the
Queensland Government in response to the NGS,
includes land management and carbon sink
initiatives. The following are some of the strategic
recommendations:
implement tree clearing controls on State lands
through provisions of the Land Act 1994 (Qld)
develop a comprehensive vegetation
management framework to address native
vegetation management issues consistently
across all tenures
deliver planning certainty to landholders,
industry and the community
promote ecologically sustainable development of
the land and protect biodiversity values
develop legislation to support tree crop
ownership and rights to harvest
remove legal impediments to plantation and
native farm forestry for crediting carbon
(Queensland Government 1999).
The passage of the Vegetation Management Act 1999
(Qld) and changes to the Broadscale Tree Clearing
Policy on Leasehold Land, which restrict areas in
which clearing of remnant vegetation can occur in
Queensland, are likely to lead to reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions in the land use change
sector.
Estimates of greenhouse gas emissions and

removals for Land Use Change and Forestry
(LUCF)National Greenhouse Gas
Inventory (NGGI)
The net emission from, or absorption of, carbon in
the terrestrial biosphere is associated with changes
in land use and other human activities that result
in changes in carbon stocks in vegetation and soil.
A natural undisturbed forest is considered to be
neither a net emission source nor a net absorption
sink of carbon. Net change in carbon stock may
occur when there is a change in land use or
management and may involve the management of
native vegetation. The Land Use Change and
Forestry sector has been identified as producing
about 20% of total Australian emissions in 1990.
Land clearing of native vegetation in Australia is
estimated to have resulted in the emission of
103 Mt CO2-e (carbon dioxide equivalents) to the
atmosphere in 1990, and 65 Mt CO2-e in 1997.
This compares with total net greenhouse gas
emissions from sectors other than land clearing of
389 Mt CO2-e in 1990 and 431 Mt CO2-e in 1997
(NGGIC 1999b).
Continued growth in emissions from the energy and
transport sectors has meant increasing economic
and political pressure to decrease land clearing.
The transfer of carbon from the atmosphere and its
storage as biomass in vegetation and soils is
potentially one mechanism of reabsorbing carbon
released by the burning of fossil fuels. In the short
term, this appears to be an effective mechanism in
combination with others. Vegetation can absorb
significant amounts of carbon in a period of about
50 to 100 years, and so can be used as a buffer
while the changes that will be required to bring
about a reduction in the rate of burning of fossil
fuels are introduced to activities and attitudes. In
the long term, the only solution is to reduce the
amount of fossil fuels burnt. Forestry and managed
plantations have provided a net sink of 26 Mt CO2
1997 for Australia (NGGIC 1999b). Regrowth
following clearing is also a significant sink,
absorbing 16 to 17 Mt of carbon dioxide in 1990
and 1996 nationally.
When vegetation is disturbed or cleared, the
biomass can break down to release large volumes of
carbon as carbon dioxide. In 1997, about 13% of
Australian carbon dioxide emissions were associated
with land clearing. As the State with the highest rate
of tree clearing for agriculture and with large areas
of land managed for agriculture (see section 1.2),
reduction in net emissions associated with land-use
change in Queensland has been identified as having
the potential to contribute significantly to limiting
growth in total emissions of greenhouse gases in
Australia. Improved quantification of emissions and
removals of greenhouse gases for LUCF, and of
estimates of the impact on net emissions of
measures such as reduction in tree clearing or

management practices for agriculture and forestry
lands, are essential. Consideration of equity in the
costs of greenhouse gas abatement will become a
significant issue in the period leading up to the first
Kyoto commitment period.
Emissions and removals of greenhouse gases,
primarily carbon dioxide, from the LUCF sector are
complex and difficult to estimate. Natural
exchanges due to the uptake of carbon dioxide in
photosynthesis, and its loss through respiration and
the decay of organic matter, which occurs between
the terrestrial biosphere and the atmosphere are
large, and anthropogenic effects are small relative
to this background. The Australian Greenhouse
Office has undertaken the National Greenhouse
Gas Inventory (NGGI) of land-based sources and
sinks using established international guidelines
(Rawson & Murphy 1999). The inventory
methodology is based on the assumption that
anthropogenic fluxes of greenhouse gases to or
from the atmosphere are equivalent to the change
in stocks of carbon in biomass and soils and
further, that the changes in stocks can be estimated
from the human activity (such as land-use change)
and the practices (e.g. burning) used to effect the
change. Emissions in any year are, in part, a result
of activities in previous years through the slow,
non-uniform decay of woody debris and change in
soil carbon. Knowledge of both the time taken and
the magnitude of these processes is required.
All activity data and emission factors that go into
compilation of the inventory have an associated
uncertainty which is often high due to lack of
relevant well-documented data and limited
understanding of processes contributing to the
overall uncertainty of emissions estimates.
Insufficient measurements and natural variability
mean that it is difficult to assign a probability
distribution to many of the parameters and thus to
quantify uncertainty in the estimate of emissions.
The Revised 1996 Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines provide a basic
methodology and default data that may be used for
national greenhouse gas inventories, but countries
are encouraged to incorporate national data, or
more sophisticated methodology, where possible.
This has been done for some categories in the
Australian and Queensland inventories but most
rely on incomplete or default data. The estimate of
emissions from LUCF is the sum for different
categories as outlined in table 3.3.
Selected parameters are discussed below for
illustration but this list is not exhaustive.
Uncertainty in the LUCF and Agriculture inventories
in Queensland is being addressed through work by
the Department of Natural Resources and the
Department of Primary Industries.
33
Table 3.3 Summary of the major parameters required in calculation of emissions and removals associated with the Land Use
Change and Forestry sector of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
Source or sink category
Parameters required for calculations of emissions and removals in the

LUCF sector of the NGGI
Changes in forest and other woody biomass stocks

1. Managed native forests
Area of forests by type and age class; annual growth rate of above-ground biomass (frequently
by conversion of commercial volume using expansion factor and wood density); carbon fraction
of biomass.
2. Plantations
Area of hardwood and softwood plantations; annual growth rate of above-ground biomass
(conversion of commercial volume requires expansion factor and wood density); carbon fraction
of biomass.
3. Commercial harvest
Volume of harvested timber by product converted to total biomass harvested using expansion
factors and density; carbon fraction of biomass.
4. Fuelwood consumed
Total fuelwood consumed less that removed from forests during clearing.
Forest and grassland conversion

a. Above ground
(i) Clearing (burning) (CO2)
1. Closed tropical and temperate forest
Annual rate of clearing by forest class; proportion of clearing that is regrowth; biomass of
vegetation cleared; carbon fraction of biomass; clearing practice (i.e. proportion of biomass burnt
in the year cleared); proportion of biomass burnt that is taken off-site as fuelwood; efficiency of
burning (i.e. proportion remaining unoxidised as charcoal.
2. Open forest
3. Woodland and scrub
(i)* Non CO2 gases (CO2-e)
Biomass burned on-site; carbon fraction of biomass; elemental C:N ratio; emission factors for
each gas from fires.
(ii) Clearing (decay)

Rate of clearing by forest class for the inventory year and for the previous y years, where y is the
time taken for decay of slash (10 years assumed in the NGGI); proportion of clearing that is
regrowth; biomass of vegetation cleared; carbon fraction of biomass; clearing practice
(i.e. proportion of biomass left to decay as slash); time for decay.
2. Open forest
(iii) Regrowth
Rate of clearing by forest class for the inventory year and for the previous z years, where z is the
average time for cyclic reclearing (10 years assumed in the NGGI); proportion of clearing that is
regrowth; biomass of vegetation cleared; proportion of cleared land maintained for crops or
pasture; carbon fraction of biomass
(crops/pasture and woody vegetation); carbon increment per year in regrowth (current
assumption for linear growth over a nominal 25 years to reach the original biomass); biomass of
crops or pasture.
2. Open forest
b. Below ground (soil and roots)
Below-ground biomass: Root biomass of vegetation cleared (based on root to shoot ratio of 0.25
in the NGGI); carbon fraction of root biomass; rate of clearing by forest type in the inventory
year and the previous y years, where y is the time of decay of roots (10 years assumed in the
NGGI); proportion of the clearing that regrows to woody vegetation and to crops/pasture; root to
shoot ratio of woody regrowth and crops/pasture; carbon fraction of regrowth by type.
Soil Carbon: rate of clearing in the inventory year and in the previous x years, where x depends
on the time course of change in soil carbon towards equilibrium; agriculture use and
management of cleared land; native soil carbon (preferably corrected for bulk density, and to a
depth of 1 mcurrent default is 30 cm); base factor (fraction of soil carbon lost due to
conversion from forest to agriculture); factors to allow for management (tillage, input); pattern of
change of soil carbon after conversion (exponential change assumed in the Australian NGGI);
time factor for change towards new equilibrium.
2. Open forest
Other
34
1. Prescribed burning of forests

and wildfire (CO2-e)
Area of forest burned in prescribed burns and wildfires; fuel load per ha; burning efficiency;
carbon fraction of biomass; elemental C:N ratio; emission factors for each gas from fires.
2. Pasture improvement, minimum tillage
Annual rate of conversion of unimproved pasture or minimum tillage (in Western Australia) over
the 25 years up to the inventory year; soil carbon increase due to conversion; fraction of
improved pasture not used in cropping rotation.
Area of clearing: The Statewide Landcover and

Trees Study (SLATS) mapping of vegetation cover
and land use provides rates of woody vegetation
clearing that are the basis for calculation of
emissions from LUC (table 3.4, see also section 1.2).
For the national inventory (NGGI) prepared for the
UNFCCC, Australia has defined forest according to
the National Forestry Industry (NFI) definition
woody vegetation with a mature, or potentially
mature, stand height exceeding 2 m and with a
canopy cover equal to, or greater than, 20%. The
definition, for the purposes of the Kyoto Protocol, is
the subject of ongoing negotiations. The SLATS
study is able to detect change in woody vegetation
cover down to about 10%. Resolution of definitional
issues will have an impact on the monitoring of
rates of deforestation and also of reforestation and
afforestation.
Table 3.4 The rates of clearing for 1981 to 1997 in
Queensland, used in the NGGI.
Years
Clearing (ha/y)
198187
297 559
475 000 (+
25%)
289 000 (+
10%)
340 000 (+
10%)
198890
199195
199597
Source
Graetz (1999)
SLATS (preliminary)
SLATS
SLATS
Biomass: In the NGGI, forests are allocated to three

categories based on Carnahan classes (AUSLIG,
1990). A biomass (tonnes dry matter/ha) is
assigned to each forest category for the purpose of
estimating the initial carbon stocks before clearing
(table 3.5). The carbon fraction in dry matter of
woody biomass is assumed to be 0.5 (NGGIC
1999b). Biomass harvesting by the Department of
Primary Industries in the TRAPS permanent
monitoring transects is giving improved estimates
of biomass and understanding of the dynamics of
woodlands in Queensland (Back et al. 1997).
Table 3.5 Biomass estimates for forest classes used to
estimate carbon stocks.
Forest class
Tropical and temperate closed forest
Biomass (t dm/ha)
233
Open forest
90
Woodland and scrub
51
Growth rates in managed forests: The Queensland

Forest Service maintains databases of plantation
and native forest growth measured in permanent
and temporary plots. These data will provide
improved inputs for the forest inventory, and in
particular, to estimates of changes in stocks in
managed native forests.
Soil carbon: One of the greatest areas of

uncertainty in inventory calculations for the LUCF
sector is the change in soil carbon following
clearing of native forests for agriculture. The carbon
content of soils before clearing of native vegetation
is variable, but the NGGI assigns an average value
for each of the three broad forest classes listed
above. In the 1997 NGGI, estimates of loss of soil
carbon are based on international default values
from the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines. The
greatest proportion of clearing in Queensland is for
pasture. The default assumption is that 30% of the
carbon present in the top 30 cm of soil before
clearing is lost over 20 years, following conversion
of forest to unimproved pasture (NGGIC 1999b).
Recent research indicates use of the default value
may significantly overestimate the loss in some
soils (Christopher et al. 1997). If soil carbon loss
were negligible following conversion, the estimated
emissions for LUC in Queensland would be about
40% lower than current estimates.
A program of paired site measurements (DNR) and
modelling (CSIRO) is being undertaken by the
National Carbon Accounting System to provide
improved data and understanding of soil carbon
levels and dynamics. These measurements will aim
to address some difficulties in previous
measurements including bulk density correction
and, where possible, carbon density to at least 1 m.
Improved understanding of the degree to which
clearing and post-clearing land management
practices (such as reduced tillage or grazing
intensity) and climatic factors (particularly
temperature and rainfall) influence the magnitude
and dynamics of soil carbon change will help
reduce uncertainty.
Carbon pools: Data relating to the stocks and
changes in stocks in other carbon pools are
required to improve estimates of fluxes associated
with LUCF. These pools include:
- coarse woody debris
- fine litter
- charcoal.
For example, practices regarding management of
coarse woody debris, may become a consideration
in carbon accounting for Kyoto compliance, since
the current alternatives of immediate release of
stored carbon through burning or slow decay over
many years impact on the committed emissions in
years following deforestation.
35
Proliferation of woody vegetation: A number of

authors have drawn upon historical sources to
suggest that there was more open grassland in preEuropean Australia than is present today (Pyne,
1991; Flannery, 1994). This assessment is, however,
challenged by other interpretations of the historical
evidence (Benson & Redpath 1997) including semiquantitative (Croft et al. 1997) and quantitative
assessment (Fensham & Holman, 1998). The area
of woody vegetation in Queensland was assessed to
be 76 000 000 ha using NOAA AVHRR imagery
(Danaher et al. 1992), with 60 000 000 ha of
grazed woodland (Burrows 1995). Because of the
large area involved, even a small increase in the
carbon density in the grazed woodlands represents
a potentially large impact on terrestrial carbon
stocks. There is ongoing debate concerning
whether the sink due to proliferation of woody
vegetation (also known as vegetation thickening
and/or woody weed invasion) should be included in
Australias national greenhouse gas inventory of
anthropogenic emissions.
Vegetation thickening has been defined as involving
an increase in the biomass of woody plants
(measured as an increase in basal area and height)
typically resulting from an increase in grazing
intensity and constancy and other management
actions that suppress fire frequency and intensity
(Noble, 1997a). Increase in aboveground woody
biomass and associated increase in soil carbon
stocks can be attributed to both human-induced
(direct and/or indirect) and natural factors.
A component of thickening has been ascribed to
altered fire management and the introduction of
grazing by ruminants in arid and semiarid
savannas in Africa (Scholes & van der Merwe,
1996), America (Archer et al. 1995) and Australia
(Burrows et al. 1998). Burrows et al. (1998) base
their arguments that thickening in Queenslands
grazed woodlands is occurring and is humaninduced, on several anecdotal sources of evidence,
carbon isotope ratios in soil organic matter
showing a shift from C4 grasses to woody C3
species over time, and on detailed measurements of
basal area increment in over 30 TRAPS sites
(standard layout of 5 x 100 m permanent
transects). There are also cases where the primary
cause of change in vegetation structure is not
anthropogenic but is climate driven. For example,
Fensham and Holman (1999) have presented
evidence that extensive dieback in savannas can
result from extreme drought events. With current
knowledge and measurement capacity it is not
possible to resolve the separate impacts of natural
and anthropogenic factors on growth and structural
change in vegetation, but ongoing research and
measurements will help to quantify the magnitude
of the fluxes due to all causes. In fact, it is not clear
in greenhouse gas accounting how attribution can
36
be made for processes when both natural factors

and anthropogenic intervention are required for
change in carbon stocks.
Burrows et al. (1998) estimate the magnitude of the
vegetation-thickening sink (due to all factors) in the
approximately 60 000 000 ha of Queenslands
grazed woodlands, to be in excess of 100 Mt CO2
per year. Inclusion of a proportion of this sink in
Australias national inventory would most likely
mean that in 1990, the LUCF sector in Australia
was a net sink rather than a net source of
greenhouse gases. The IPCC Revised 1996
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
allow for the inclusion of any forest which
experiences periodic or ongoing human
interventions that affect carbon stocks and for
which the necessary data are available. Thus,
inclusion of change in carbon stocks due to
proliferation of woody vegetation in the grazed
savannas depends on resolving the change
resulting from human activity and documenting the
supporting data for the magnitude of the change.
Emissions estimates: Table 3.6 gives the estimated
rates of emissions or removals associated with
LUCF for Australia for 1990 and 1997 (NGGIC
1999b). Estimates for Queensland are also given,
based on the same methodology. It is important to
note that ongoing research is providing new data
and understanding of processes that will
significantly affect the estimated emissions from
LUCF. Table 3.6 presents a possible range in
estimates with inclusion of changes to data inputs
or definitions. Full carbon accounting over time
would assist accurate estimates of the magnitude
and uncertainty in stocks and fluxes of all pools in
the terrestrial biosphere, but sufficient data are not
yet available.
Measures to reduce emissions: Restricting clearing
of native vegetation has the potential to decrease
net emissions in Queensland. Based on the current
data and methodology, restricting clearing of
100 000 ha of undisturbed woodland in Queensland
will result in emissions savings in the order of 5 to
12 Mt CO2-e.
Other measures that may result in reduction in the
net emissions from the LUCF and Agriculture
sectors include:
reduced harvest of forests
increased planting of woody vegetation
fire regime management
sustainable management of cropping and grazing
lands to conserve soil carbon levels
management of rangelands for optimal stocking
levels.
The magnitude and, in some cases, even the
direction of the impact of these and other measures
over time is unknown.
Table 3.6 Estimated emissions from the LUCF sector as published in the NGGI for Australia. Values for Queensland for LUC
estimated using the 1997 NGGI methodology are given, but the uncertainty is seen in the possible range. Vegetation thickening is
currently not included in the NGGI.
Category
Total (all sectors)
Australia
Queensland
Emissions (Mt CO2-e)

1990
1997
Emissions (Mt CO2-e)

1990
1997
492
496
76 (15% total)
38 (8% total)
LUCF
NGGI methodology
Including thickening
(3070)
(1550)
(-4070)
(-5050)
63
47
(3570)
(2055)
LUC
NGGI methodology
103 (21% )
65 (13%)
Possible range
Carbon credits and carbon trading

The Kyoto Protocol provides for mechanisms to
facilitate the achievement of greenhouse gas
commitments by parties in a more cost effective
manner than if they acted alone.
Joint Implementation (JI) (Article 6) allows
exchanges between Annex 1 countries of
Emission Reduction Units (ERUs).
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) (Article
12) involves arrangements between an Annex 1
country and a non-Annex 1 country to generate
Certified Emissions Reduction (CERs).
Emissions Trading (Article 17) allows Annex 1
countries to use international emissions trading
to assist in meeting their emission commitments.
The principles, modalities, rules and guidelines for
these mechanisms will be negotiated at the 6th
Conference of Parties (COP 6), in The Hague, in
November 2000. The role of sinks in the
mechanisms, particularly in CDM, has yet to be
determined. Incorporating land-based sinks and
emissions reductions into a national emissions
trading system would provide additional stimulus to
the creation of forest and agricultural soil sinks and
this would likely result in associated environmental
(e.g. sustainability, biodiversity) and socioeconomic
benefits.
Emissions trading is likely to be market-driven with
carbon credits generated or purchased by
companies to offset other greenhouse emissions.
One suggested structure would be for emissions
trading to be based on emission permits (probably
in units of tonnes CO2-e) that would be
interchangeable with carbon credits issued for each
tonne CO2-e sequestered on Kyoto land. There are
many issues yet to be negotiated concerning
measuring, monitoring and verifying carbon credits
that relate to baseline, permanence of the sink,
leakage (unmonitored impacts of a project outside
the monitored boundary) and how to treat impacts
of natural events such as pests and fire. In addition,
administrative issues such as a system for issuing,
trading and tracking carbon credits, a system for
establishing ownership of carbon rights and for
measuring and verifying carbon credits, and a

legislative framework for codifying these systems
have to be established. Queensland legislation
dealing with carbon rights is currently under
discussion.
Examples of sinks projects that could generate
carbon credits for Queensland include conservation
of forests from clearing or logging, agroforestry,
and enhancement of carbon sequestration in
rangeland soils through improved management of
stocking rates. It is difficult to estimate with
confidence the sink potential of these activities with
the current level of understanding and data and
measurement capacity for the terrestrial biosphere.
There are natural limits on the availability of large
areas of land suitable for forest, and costs of
establishment and maintenance are considerable.
This, coupled with the fact that the absolute rate of
sequestration will be low for the first years after
planting of trees will mean that the sink due to
revegetation activities is likely to be relatively small
in the first commitment period. Plantings under
programs such as bushcare and landcare are likely
to deliver limited greenhouse benefits for the first
commitment period, but the longer-term
sequestration potential and associated
environmental benefits must also be considered
and valued. Build-up of soil carbon in grazing lands
is likely to be slow and inherent variability may
make measurement and verification difficult over
short periods, although potential sequestration is
large because of the areas involved. Nongreenhouse benefits of sustainable management of
grazing lands are important.
The greatest potential for net greenhouse gas
emissions reduction from the land-based sector in
the first commitment period is likely to be from
restrictions in land clearing. However, eligibility for
carbon credits under the Kyoto Protocol has yet to
be determined.
37
38
return to contents
Regional and local processes
Contributors
Impacts of habitat loss on biodiversity
Kay Dorricott, Environmental Protection Agency
David Hannah, Environmental Protection Agency
Tree removal: implications for soil processes and

soil loss
Bruce Carey, Department of Natural Resources
Mark Silburn, Department of Natural Resources
Craig Strong, Griffith University
Impacts of domestic grazing within

remnant vegetation
Soil structure
Geoff Smith, Department of Natural Resources

Andrew Franks, Department of Natural Resources
Annie Kelly, Department of Natural Resources
Soil acidification
Riparian zones
Jo Voller, Department of Natural Resources
Sally Boon, Department of Natural Resources
Des McGarry, Department of Natural Resources

Phil Moody, Department of Natural Resources
Andrew Noble, CSIRO
Hydrology
Mark Freebairn, Department of Natural Resources
Ecosystem repair and management
Salinity
Andrew Grodecki, Department of Natural Resources

Wetlands, mangroves, and other coastal vegetation

Estelle Ross, Environmental Protection Agency
Joe Scanlan, Department of Natural Resources

Chris Chilcott, Department of Natural Resources
Tree decline and dieback, nutrient cycling
Improved pastures
Peter Voller, Department of Natural Resources

Chris Chilcott, Department of Natural Resources
Ian Partridge, Department of Natural Resources
Pest invasions
Mark Cant, Department of Natural Resources

Andrew Grodecki, Department of Natural Resources
Joe Scanlan, Department of Natural Resources

Dane Panetta, Department of Natural Resources
Management and production aspects
Timber production and farm forestry
Alternative products
Jude Westrup, Department of Natural Resources
Urban and peri-urban
Alan Barton, Brisbane City Council
39
Summary
This section examines the impacts of habitat loss
on biodiversity and subsequent management and
land uses on conservation of biodiversity and
ecological processes. The evidence permits
preliminary recommendations for retention,
replanting and active management of native
vegetation, and associated land management
practices, but concludes that imperfect
understanding requires ongoing research and
adaptive management. This section looks at four
major themesthe ecological impacts of habitat
loss on biodiversity, associated land degradation
issues, evidence of production and management
effects of managing vegetation, and other values of
native vegetation. The following lists the main
points discussed under these themes.
Land clearing has been identified as one of the
major threats to biodiversity in Australia.
Processes such as land clearing lead to
fragmentation of habitat, resulting in loss of
habitat, reduction in size of each habitat and
increased isolation of remnant patches. Habitat
is critical to species survival. Other processes
that can threaten biodiversity, and to which
remnant areas are more vulnerable, include
grazing, predation, changes in fire regime and
competition from feral plants and animals.
The amount of habitat required to preserve
biodiversity at a regional level is not known,
although the amount is likely to be dependent on
each region, and be species specific. Research
indicates that local and regional losses of
biodiversity (species richness) commence with
habitat loss, but once remnant vegetation
declines to around 30% of preclearing extent,
rates of species loss accelerate dramatically.
Regional ecosystems are the best available
surrogate for biodiversity at the species level. On
available evidence, 30% is the minimum
benchmark for the rate of retention of Regional
Ecosystems to ensure against substantial
extinction in the longer term, although there are
many factors influencing this figure.
The total area and pattern of native vegetation
across the landscape are important to habitat
value for plants and animals. Size, shape,
connectedness, condition and land use of remnant
vegetation become important to the viability of
remnants once clearing or other disturbance has
commenced. It is important to recognise the role
of corridors of vegetation in mitigating the effects
of habitat fragmentation. The size of remnants
required to conserve biodiversity varies with
species and habitat type. Larger fragments are
likely to support greater diversity, and reduce the
area affected by edge effects.
40
Providing linkages between remnant patches of

vegetation can increase the viability of
populations and species, aid dispersal and allow
for movement of wildlife between patches. The
effectiveness of corridors varies with a range of
factors: habitat structure and quality, dimensions
of the corridor (particularly length to width
ratio), surrounding land use, use of corridor and
biology of species expected to use the corridor.
Generally, wider, larger corridors or patches are
better for biodiversity conservation.
Grazing can impact on remnant condition.
Impacts may include browsing or rubbing of
vegetation, changes in species composition, soil
compaction and erosion, eutrophication of water
sources, spread of weeds, and altered fire regime.
Changes in species structure can alter ecosystem
functioning and cause a loss in critical ecosystem
services. Overgrazing and poor land management
practices for grazing appear to have the greatest
impact, and the seriousness of impacts varies
across the landscape and through time.
Understanding of size and connectivity limits to
viability of remnants can be applied to ecosystem
repair. Revegetation has the potential to repair
lost ecosystem function as well as protection of
species and amenity. Ongoing research is needed
to provide adequate and efficient management
information across the diverse Queensland
landscape to deliver significant levels of
ecosystem repair.
Riparian vegetation and wetlands provide
vegetation with particular ecological and
catchment values. Riparian vegetation can buffer
streams from nutrient and sediment flows, and
trees can maintain stream bank stability,
enhance stream water quality and are an
important source of biodiversity. Guidelines for
retention of riparian zones require consideration
of combined functions of riparian vegetation.
Wetlands act as buffers for streams, storage and
filtration of sediment, nurseries for commercial
fish and crustaceans.
Maintenance of the productive potential and use of
land and associated ecological processes, requires
a more comprehensive approach to land
management than retention of native vegetation at
certain levels. Consideration of land degradation
and production relationships must be part of a
sustainable approach to native vegetation
management:
General tree death or dieback incidents have
been associated with a range of land degradation
and other possible causes. A number of causal
factors are discussed: insects, salinity, nutrient
enrichment, pathogens, senescence, drought and
waterlogging.
Condition of remnant vegetation can be affected

by the occurrence of undesirable plant and animal
species. Disturbance (e.g. grazing, changes in fire
regime) can allow the opportunity for the
establishment of undesirable species. Native
vegetation can host predator species that control
production pests in surrounding land uses.
The role of vegetation in prevention of soil loss
and maintenance of soil condition is
complicated. Erosion of soil is controlled by a
number of factors, including slope, ground cover
and infiltration rate. These factors are affected by
management practices such as grazing, fire and
vegetation clearing. There are some studies that
demonstrate an increase in run-off following the
clearing of trees, although pastured blocks have
been demonstrated to be efficient in minimising
run-off. In riparian areas trees have been shown
to protect stream banks from mass failure and
erosion by adding to bed and bank stability.
The physical condition of soil structure can be
strongly impacted by post-clearing activities. Soil
compaction can occur with use of heavy
machinery during tree clearing if the soil is wet
or particularly vulnerable to structure decline.
Compaction is more likely to occur under heavy
grazing, particularly again where the soil is wet
or fragile.
Vegetation exerts a considerable influence on soil
fertility. Trees have been described as nutrient
pumps, transporting nutrients from deep within
the soil, and redepositing them in leaf litter.
Removal of trees will have impacts on the
availability of nutrients and organic matter.
Some land uses are particularly acidifying, and
include cropping, which involves the removal of
large quantities of harvested material;
application of ammonium-based fertilisers; and
introduction of legumes. Particular soil types are
more vulnerable to acidification than others, and
careful management and consideration of land
use are recommended.
Tree clearing has a direct impact on the
hydrological regime. Generally the removal of
deep-rooted trees increases deep drainage. This
may result in the expression of salinity at or near
the soil surface. While Queensland currently has
limited salinity problems compared to other
States, there is potential for significant increases
in saline-affected lands in the next 1030 years.
Areas likely to be impacted are largely restricted
to areas with between 600 and 1500 mm rainfall
per annum. Assessment of salinity hazard risk
can ensure clearing will not result in salinity.
Revegetation plays a significant role in
management of saline-affected land.
Cropping is generally conducted on cleared land.
There is often a long-term decline in productivity
as the time since initial clearing and
development increases. Windbreaks can be

useful in protecting high-value crops from wind
damage, although there may be some sacrifice in
productivity close to treed windbreaks where
trees compete with the crops.
Tree clearing is primarily conducted in
Queensland to promote increased pasture
productivity. Vegetation can also provide fodder
for grazing livestock, as well as shade and
shelter from harsh climatic conditions. These
benefits can have significant production benefits.
There is substantial Queensland evidence that
non-leguminous trees and shrubs can decrease
pasture production within their projected
canopies and beyond. Individual trees can have a
variety of impacts varying from net increase to
no net effect to a net decrease. There are several
important situations that report improved
pasture growth with trees.
Clearing of vegetation is often followed by
regrowth or regeneration of the original plant.
Ongoing regrowth management will be necessary
if the consequential pasture production increases
are required.
Fire has an effect on plant ecology, the extent of
which depends on fire intensity, frequency and
season of burning. The interaction between an
adaptive trait and fire regime may facilitate
survival or reproduction. Fire may be used as a
management tool for productivity as well as
conservation. Changes in the use of fire have
happened over time.
The benefit of retaining and managing native
vegetation for its timber and other commercial
values is only now beginning to be realised. The
potential of farm forestry enterprises is being
explored at various levels. A number of national
and international policy initiatives and factors,
such as global markets, carbon trading, the
Montreal Process, certification and labelling of
forest products, and the Regional Forest
Agreement process, are likely to affect the future
direction of these enterprises. There is potential
to manage private native forest areas to
maximise conservation outcomes for these areas.
Retaining native vegetation may offer ecological
and economic benefits through new crops,
diversified agriculture or alternative products.
Alternative products may include bush foods,
ecotourism, pharmaceutical products, honey, and
landscaping materials.
Benefits from retaining native vegetation may be
measurable short-term economic benefits and
long term benefits to the landholder and general
community that are not easily measured.
Benefits to the whole of society include aesthetic
and amenity benefits.
41
4.1 Impacts of habitat loss on

biodiversity
Land clearing has been identified as the major
threat to biodiversity in Australia (Ecological
Sustainable Development Working Party on
Biological Diversity 1991; Glaznig 1995). Systematic
assessment of fauna from various parts of Australia
attributes declines in species directly or indirectly
to habitat loss (Saunders et al. 1985; Loyn 1987;
Dickman et al. 1993; Barrett et al. 1994; Smith &
Smith 1994). For example, Garnett (1992), in a
review of bird populations, cited clearance of
habitat as the most frequently inferred means of
decline for 150 birds classified as threatened or
extinct. Many species of fauna are dependent on
trees and the habitat they provide, and therefore
undergo decreases in abundance and extent
following tree clearing. For example, the glossy
black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami, classified
as Vulnerable) is dependent on brigalowbelah
communities for habitat, the red-tailed black
cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus magnificus) depends on
supply of eucalypt seeds as its major food source,
the rufous bettong (Aepyprymnus rufescens) relies on
eucalypt woodland for habitat, and various reptiles
live almost solely on trees and under logs (e.g. tree
dtella and tree skink both of which occur on gidgee
and brigalow). Australia has a large number of
obligate tree-hollow nesting birds. Hollows are
characteristic of mature tree communities, and take
centuries to form (Abensperg-Traun & Smith 1993).
Studies carried out in Queenslands brigalow region
(Russell et al. 1992), and in similar areas in
northern New South Wales (Barrett et al. 1994;
Ellis & Wilson 1992), have shown that there are
substantially more fauna species in treed areas
compared to adjacent cleared areas.
There are many plant species threatened by land
clearance in Queensland, including ooline (Cadellia
pentastylis) and other softwood species, Chinchilla
white gum (Eucalyptus argophloia), and several grass
and herb species from the Darling Downs region
(Fensham 1998b). However, overall there appear to
be fewer obvious examples of plant species directly
impacted by clearing compared to fauna species.
This could be at least partly because plants can
survive for extended periods in small remnants
(<5 ha) which are too small to support fauna
species. However, the long-term viability of such
remnants is questionable (Hobbs & Saunders 1994)
and the decline in flora populations may be more
insidious (McIntyre 1992), but in the long term just
as severe as declines in fauna.
42
Other agents also contribute to the decline of

biodiversity, and their impact is often
indistinguishable from those of land clearing. These
other agents include grazing (Foran et al. 1990;
Morton and Price 1994; see section 4.1.4),
predation, changed fire regime (e.g. Morton 1990)
and competition from feral plants and animals

(Humphries et al. 1991; Low 1999). Recher (1999)
predicts that, with current patterns and trends of
land use, up to 50% of Australias bird species may
be lost in the next century. However, not all native
species are disadvantaged by land clearance. Tree
clearing, and the associated creation of more open
landscapes with increased grass cover and artificial
water points, is associated with increased
abundance of species such as plains turkeys,
galahs, cockatiels, woodswallows, budgerigars,
zebra finches, diamond doves, pipits, songlarks and
some macropods (e.g. Saunders & Curry 1990).
However, it is not the species that prosper under
European management, but rather those that suffer,
that should form the main focus of biodiversity
conservation.
This section will look first at the question of how
much habitat is required to ensure biodiversity at
the landscape level. The physical effects of habitat
loss on biodiversity, including fragmentation and
landscape connectivity, and the implications of
disturbance (particularly grazing) and remnant
condition for biodiversity will be discussed.
Ecosystems with particular roles in landscape
functioning (e.g. riparian zones, wetlands) are
examined in more detail. There is also a brief
discussion on ecosystem repair to reinstate
biodiversity.
4.1.1 How much habitat is required

for conservation of biodiversity
at a regional level?
Despite the widespread view amongst scientists that
habitat loss is the major threat to biodiversity in
Australia, the relationship between species survival
and habitat loss is not well understood. The
following is a review of the existing literature on
species and habitat loss at a landscape scale, with
Australian, and particularly Queensland, examples.
Habitat-versus-species relationships are likely to be
region and species specific. Most Australian
mammal extinctions have occurred in arid areas
where habitat loss has been minimal. However, the
process that led to these extinctions actually
highlights the importance of habitat (Morton 1990).
It is thought that the key desert resources that
allowed species to survive the severe droughts of
the interior became contracted with the advent of
pastoralism. The concentration of fauna in these
habitat enclaves made them easy prey for feral
foxes and cats, resulting in the significant decline in
medium-sized mammals. The extinction of fauna in
relation to tree clearing follows some of these same
processes. Clearing of habitat forces animals into
remnant vegetation, where they face a range of
problems associated with the reduction of habitat,
including increased predation, inbreeding, lack of
dispersal opportunities, and a suite of influences
known as edge effects (see Andren 1994).
Extinction due to habitat loss may be particularly

acute in Australia because of the extra
environmental strains of drought and flood.
Ecosystems, and their component functions
subjected to stresses, display a degree of elasticity
in condition from which recovery is possible
(although the return state may not be the same as
the original). Thresholds represent those levels of
environmental change or damage, beyond which
recovery is not possible. It is generally thought that
the relationship between habitat loss and species
loss is non-linear. Initial losses in habitat are
accompanied by relatively small reductions in
species numbers, but as habitat loss increases,
large losses in species are associated with small
reductions in habitat (Connor & McCoy 1979;
Shafer 1990; Koopowitz et al. 1994). These simple
models suggest that with 30% habitat loss, 10% of
species will be lost; while at 50% habitat loss,
15% of species will be lost. The models can also
offer information on threshold levels for ecosystems
and species. This basic information has been used
to limit clearing of every land type in south-western
New South Wales to 30% of its original extent
(Southern Mallee Regional Planning Committee
1999).
Bennett and Ford (1997) carried out a study on
the woodland avifauna of northern Victoria and
documented a dramatic decline in species numbers
once habitat fell below 10% tree cover. They
highlighted the lag phase between habitat loss and
species decline and indicated that many of the
species persisting in regions with more than 10%
habitat retention are imperilled because of small
population sizes. There is ample evidence of a lag
time between habitat and subsequent species loss.
The status of birds continued to decline in the
Adelaide region between the 1970s and 1980s,
despite relatively little loss of habitat in the region
during this time (Paton et al. 1994). Other examples
where bird species have become locally extinct long
after fragmentation has ceased come from Western
Australia (Saunders 1989) and Victoria (Traill et al.
1996).
The scientific advisory group to the Commonwealth
of Australia (Pitman et al. 1995) concluded that
biodiversity could be adequately protected if 15%
of each forest type was contained in a conservation
reserve and if the non-reserved part of that forest
type was managed in a sustainable way. The nonreserved forest estate is, in general, not analogous
to clearing pastoral lands because the expressed
aim of forestry management is to recover forest
structure through the regeneration of native tree
species, where as pastoralism often involves the
reduction in woody species and establishment of
native or exotic grassland or pasture. It would
appear that retention rates in the pastoral
landscape must greatly exceed those for Australian
forests if the conservation viability of the two
regions is to be matched.
In Queensland, the Eastern Darling Downs is one of

the most heavily fragmented regions and natural
habitat is currently about 23% of the original area
(Fensham 1998b). Two field zoologists have
assessed the mammal fauna of the Eastern Darling
Downs based on historical records and their current
knowledge of distributions (Craig Eddie & Pat
McConnell 2000, pers. comm., 14 June). They
suggest that the original fauna was likely to have
comprised 32 native species. Of this, four species
(13%) were assumed to be locally extinct in the
region. A further eight species were regarded as rare
which, together with the presumed extinct species,
represent 39% of the mammals in the region.
An extensive bird inventory was conducted at
Coomooboolaroo in Duaringa Shire over the period
from 1873 to 1924 (Woinarski & Catterall 1999).
The owner during this time recorded around 225
bird species from the property, with about 30 of
these being irregular visitors. In a recent census of
the property (over a shorter time frame), it was
revealed that 150 bird species still live on or visit
Coomooboolaroo, and the number may well
increase with further surveys. If the irregular visitors
are excluded from the original list, the currently
known fauna represents 77% of the original fauna.
The property has not been exceptionally cleared;
indeed, the landholders here have been clearly
sympathetic to wildlife and their environment. The
loss of birds is apparently not restricted to the
softwood and brigalow scrubs that have suffered
the most clearance regionally, as there have also
been declines in many bird species associated with
the eucalypt forests and woodlands that make up
the bulk of the property. The loss of birds at
Coomooboolaroo is almost certainly symptomatic
of the broader region. Data from 1995 for Duaringa
Shire indicated that habitat retention is currently
about 42% of the original area, which is the same
rate as that for the entire Brigalow Belt bioregion at
that time. At even larger scales, there is good
evidence for the loss of birds across the tropical
savannas of northern Australia (Franklin 1999).
In a worldwide review of fauna studies, Andren
(1994) found that 30% habitat retention was a
critical threshold. He verified that species loss
occurs above 30% habitat retention, but that below
this level the retention of species is more reliant on
landscape configuration than habitat loss per se.
When habitat is examined as individual remnants,
there is considerable literature to demonstrate that
large remnants provide more viable habitat and
contain more species than small remnants (section
4.1.2). Various bird studies have suggested that
1020 ha provide a minimum viable habitat size for
many birds (Catterall et al. 1998). Ecosystem
function is greatly impaired as remnants reduce in
size and particularly as their edge to area ratio
increases. This is clearly visible in relation to exotic
invasion. Buffel grass, while clearly of great value
to the cattle industry, is particularly invasive and
43
has been shown to replace native plant species

(Fairfax & Fensham 2000). Many remnants in the
pastoral district are heavily invaded by buffel grass,
while other exotics lower the conservation value of
remnants elsewhere. In some vegetation types, such
as rainforest and acacia forest, weed invasion
brings a shift from fire resistance to flammability.
The native species in small and linear remnants are
the most vulnerable to fire, exotic invasion, grazing
and predation.
between production and conservation, the

productive potential of individual Regional
Ecosystems (REs) may be accounted for. Regional
Ecosystems represent the best available surrogate
for biodiversity at the species level. Hence they may
provide an appropriate base unit for a system of
thresholds. On available evidence, 30% is the
minimum benchmark for the rate of retention of
REs to ensure against substantial extinction in the
longer term.
Clearly we can expect further extinctions if habitat

loss continues in Queensland. This is likely to be
most acute in the regions or provinces (see figure
4.1) that have already been extensively cleared,
namely the Central Queensland Coast, the Brigalow
Belt and the Southeast Queensland bioregions.
These bioregions have already lost sufficient
habitat that, using derived models (see figure 1.1),
would suggest 20% species loss. This predicted
rate of extinction is in keeping with the anecdotal
evidence from Queensland and elsewhere, allowing
for further extinction of rare species as small
remnant populations lose viability and ecosystem
function is altered. (Ecosystem function or
services is discussed further in section 3.2.)
While this benchmark is in keeping with

approaches to managing ecosystems for
biodiversity elsewhere in Australia (e.g. Pitman et
al. 1995), there are many factors that can
determine an appropriate level to retain. For
example, ecosystems that have a restricted
preclearing extent may be cleared down to unviable
areas if the benchmark is strictly adhered to.
Therefore, in the case of the Regional Ecosystems
defined in Queensland and used in the Vegetation
Management Act 1999 (Qld), in addition to the
proportion of preclearing extent, a 10 000 ha
minimum area has been incorporated into the
criteria for assessing status. This helps to ensure
adequate protection of habitats with a restricted
distribution.
Summary
In deciding where habitat should be retained for
conservation purposes, it is generally recognised
that a greater sacrifice should be made in the most
productive regions and for the most productive land
typesthose areas that have been
disproportionately cleared. Patterns of clearing in
Queensland reflect both topography and soil
fertility and hence lowland areas have been
extensively cleared and fragmented (Martin et al.
2000). In order to provide a balanced trade-off
80
z=0.2
Central west
New South Wales
z=0.25
z=0.3
Species loss (%)
60
The requirements of individual species,

populations, individual ecosystems and the
management and condition of the surrounding
landscape, would also be expected to impact on the
benchmark. Ecosystems that are left highly
fragmented and surrounded by more intense land
use (such as exotic pasture development; see
MacIntyre et al. 2000 for an example of
recommendations) are likely to require greater
retention than ecosystems that are retained within
a native species matrix (e.g. mulga woodlands, see
Wheat belt
New South Wales
40
Coomooboolaroo
20
Darling
Downs
Northern plains
Victoria
?
0
60
20
40
60
80
100
Area cleared (%)
Figure 4.1 Theoretical species loss from international models. Data from the studies mentioned in the text. Mammals in the
central west New South Wales, wheat belt New South Wales, Darling Downs Queensland, and birds at Coomooboolaroo
central Queensland and northern plains Victoria. The position of the tail of the arrow is the species that are known to be
extinct. The position of the arrowhead is the species that are extremely rare. The lines in the graph are taken from a report to
the Southern Mallee Regional Planning Committee (1999), which adapted empirical equations derived by Connor and McCoy
(1979) and Simberloff (1992).
44
Cameron & Blick 1982). While the benchmark

works at a bioregional scale, habitat loss at a more
local scale (e.g. province sensu Sattler & Williams
1999; see figure 1.1) may impact on the
benchmark, for example 1998 local leasehold treeclearing guidelines for the Darling Downs increased
State-wide retention thresholds due to a high
amount of habitat loss in the local district. For
many habitats that are agriculturally productive,
such as temperate grassland or brigalow woodland,
it is too late to achieve this benchmark. Many other
ecosystems are likely to retain higher levels of
vegetation based on guidelines for vegetation
retention in areas vulnerable to other
environmental risks such as salinity or erosion.
4.1.2 Fragmentation
A consequence of agricultural development has
been the vast reduction in intact native vegetation,
and subsequently the high degree of fragmentation
of remaining vegetation (Wallace & Moore 1987).
Bennett (1999) identifies three components of the
fragmentation process:
the overall loss of habitats in the landscape
(see section 4.1.1)
reduction in the size of blocks of habitat
(habitat reduction)
increased isolation of habitats (habitat isolation).
This section examines the latter two in more detail.
The study of landscape ecology recognises the
structure and spatial relationships, and interactions
over space and time between the ecosystems
and/or patches that make up a landscape (Forman
& Godron 1986). There are sophisticated software
packages available to quantify landscape structure
(e.g. McGarigal et al. 1998) and theoretical
frameworks available to optimise or reintegrate
fragmented landscapes (Hobbs & Norton 1996;
Hobbs & Saunders 1991; McIntyre & Hobbs 1999).
These procedures work on the assumption that
planning and managing over an entire landscape
will optimise protection of values compared to
planning and managing at individual patch or
subregional scales. In Queensland, vegetation
mapping could be used as a basis to reintegrate
habitats across the landscape, although further
work is required to assess on which options best
meet the requirements of species and ecosystems
over space and time.
In many areas, landscapes cannot be classified into
remnant versus non-remnant areas, and it may be
more appropriate to treat them as variegated
(McIntyre & Barret 1992; McIntyre 1994; McIntyre &
Hobbs 1999). That is, in between remnant
vegetation and vegetation which has been cleared
and planted with crops, there is a continuum of
semi-modified vegetation that will possess
biodiversity and other values. In this case, a
consideration of the matrix that fragments are
embedded in can be just as important a determinant
of biodiversity value as size and arrangement of

fragments (e.g. MacIntyre & Hobbs 1999).
Fragmentation (of remnant or semi-modified
vegetation) leads to several problems for the
protection of biodiversity. Firstly, the viability of
isolated small blocks of vegetation is generally poor
(Hobbs 1991). This may be exacerbated if remnant
vegetation is not protected from domestic livestock
and inappropriate fire regimes. These isolated
blocks are not efficient in supporting a wide variety
of native fauna, and risk further degradation from
salinity, grazing, weed invasion and rising
watertables (Hobbs 1987). Another aspect of the
problem is lack of habitat diversity. In welldeveloped agricultural areas, remaining vegetation
tends to be a non-random sample of former
habitats: swamps that could not be drained, steep
hillsides, and small patches of rainforest
maintained for conservation. These remnant
patches support a narrower spectrum of flora and
fauna than if all habitats were represented.
In practice, problems associated with fragmentation
may be mitigated by interconnecting remnant areas
and/or specifying a minimum size of retention
areas for the protection of biodiversity and/or
managing the condition of patches.
Habitat reductionwhat is a viable

fragment size required for conservation of
biodiversity?
An important element in the physical effect of
fragmentation is the reduction in the size of
individual habitat patches. There is considerable
evidence indicating that larger remnants provide
more viable habitat and contain more species than
smaller remnants (e.g. Barrett et al. 1994; Catterall
et al. 1998). However, the size of remnants required
to conserve biodiversity varies with species and
habitat types. For example, bird studies in southern
Queensland have concluded that 10 ha provides a
minimum viable habitat size (Catterall et al. 1998).
Similarly, studies of birds in woodlands and open
forest in northern New South Wales (Barrett et al.
1994) have shown that remnant patches of 1020
ha are required to provide suitable habitat for the
majority (80%) of bird species. Studies from
Western Australia (Abensperg-Traun et al. 1996b;
Smith et al. 1996) suggest that small remnants
(<5 ha) can provide suitable habitat for reptiles
and invertebrates. McIntyre et al. (2000)
recommend woodland patches of 510 ha are
required to support the majority of native plant and
animal species in grassy woodlands in south-east
Queensland.
Some unpublished studies from Queensland are
beginning to establish data for some ecosystems.
Staff from the Queensland Parks and Wildlife
Service (Emerald), Griffith University, Queensland
Museum and Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife
Commission, have been investigating the effects of
45
tree clearing and fragmentation on the fauna of

eucalypt woodlands in central Queensland.
Preliminary results indicate a trend in declining
species richness with declining remnant size (David
Hannah pers. comm.; summarised in table 4.1).
Large woodland areas (over 2000 ha) consistently
have more species present than medium-sized
remnants (50300 ha) that, in turn, have more
species than do small remnants (520 ha). For
birds, small remnants and linear strips often
contain widespread generalist bird species that can
utilise the changed conditions of these sites. As
remnant size increases, however, forest-dependent
species become more common. Initial observations
suggest that where herbaceous, log and litter cover
are intact, small mammals and reptiles will persist
within remnants, regardless of size classes and
connectivity. In general, as clearing reduced the
size and cover of tree groves and other vegetation
patches, counts for the grey butcherbird, yellowthroated miner, striated pardalote, pale-headed
rosella and Carnabys skink declined, whereas
counts for the red-backed fairy wren and house
mouse increased (Ludwig et al. forthcoming).
Counts for the weebill, Bynoes gecko and the
delicate mouse did not significantly change with
clearing. Of these ten common fauna species, the
pale-headed rosella was the only species to
significantly change its abundance (higher counts)
with increased levels of livestock grazing,
suggesting that clearing more strongly affects
abundances of common fauna than does grazing.
In another fauna survey of a property in
Waggamba Shire with 10% total tree cover,
shadelines ranging from 20200 m in width and
small patches up to 5 ha, a total of 7 native
mammal, 81 bird, 17 reptile and 7 frog species
were found (Richard Johnson, EPA Roma unpub.).
This represents more than a third of the total
species predicted to occur in the surrounding shire
(including about half the total bird species). Thus,
while these shadelines sizes and total tree covers
are too small to protect all species, particularly
those that require larger areas (e.g. eastern yellow
robin Eopsaltria australis, imperial hairstreak
butterfly Jalmenus evagoras evagoras), they may have
considerable conservation value.
Habitat isolationthe role of wildlife

corridors
Habitat fragments are often isolated from one
another by a hostile environment (Andrn 1994),
although habitat patches do not exist in an noninteractive matrix, and the surrounding agriculture
or secondary forest (Power 1996; Whitmore 1997)
may offer a habitat or means of dispersal to some
terrestrial species. Ecosystem processes such as
seed dispersal, pollination of plants, predatorprey
relationships, gene flow and dispersal of disease
and parasites, can be sensitive to isolation effects
(Bennett 1999). The ideas of dispersal have borne
further theoretical investigations into the viability of
subpopulations and the concepts of natural
extinctions, recolonisations and the persistence of
the metapopulation as a whole (Hanski et al. 1995;
Collinge 1996).
Wildlife corridors are areas of retained native
vegetation that link other remnant vegetation within
an otherwise non-remnant landscape. They are
often seen as an essential element of nature
conservation planning (e.g. Noss 1987; Chenoweth
& Associates 1994), mitigating the impact of habitat
loss and fragmentation. Linked large remnants are
likely to provide more viable habitat at the regional
scale than many small fragments with a high edge
to area ratio (Cale & Hobbs 1994).
Definitions of corridors abound (e.g. Saunders &
Hobbs 1991; Harris & Scheck 1991) but all include
the following:
a continuous strip of vegetation
usually link larger tracts of vegetation
used or capable of being used by wildlife for
movement
capable of being a habitat in their own right.
Corridors may be classified according to their
continuity and connectivity as well as by their
origins (Loney & Hobbs 1991). Natural corridors,
remnant corridors, restored corridors and riparian
corridors are such examples, with classification not
necessarily mutually exclusive. Riparian corridors
have been referred to as Australias ecological
arteries (Recher 1993; Sattler 1993b). These
corridors usually contain the most fertile and well-
Table 4.1 Fauna species richness (mean and standard deviation) in eucalypt woodland remnants of different area and isolation
classes, and eucalypt regrowth and pasture sites in central Queensland.
Site type
46
Description
Birds
Mammals
Reptiles
Large
>2000 ha (8 treatments)
55.6 (10.0)
7.5 (3.1)
15.9 (5.8)
Medium patch (connected)
50300 ha (8 treatments)
47.8 (11.1)
7.1 (2.8)
14.9 (4.2)
Medium patch (unconnected)
44.3 (13.5)
7.0 (3.0)
12.8 (3.1)
Linear strip (connected)
50150 m wide (5 treatments)
42.0 (6.6)
5.5 (1.7)
11.8 (3.6)
Linear strip (unconnected)
50150 m wide (8 treatments)
32.8 (11.3)
5.2 (2.8)
8.8 (6.1)
Small patch (unconnected)
26.5 (9.3)
5.4 (1.8)
10.1 (4.6)
Eucalypt regrowth
5 m +/- 3 m high (8 treatments)
29.6 (10.5)
6.9 (3.1)
8.9 (6.3)
Pasture
Improved and exotic (8 treatments)
20.8 (4.6)
6.4 (2.5)
7.0 (4.5)
watered part of the landscape, and are highly

significant from both a productive and conservation
perspective.
There are three main reasons why corridors may be
used to protect biodiversity in a fragmented
landscape (Simberloff & Cox 1987):
1) They allow increased migration or movement of
wildlife. It is predicted (from equilibrium theory)
that they allow more species to survive than if
vegetation is present as smaller fragments with
no migration.
2) They provide habitat for wildlife in their own
right, particularly for fauna that may require
larger diversity and amount of habitat to meet
their food requirements than may be present in
smaller isolated fragments.
3) They prevent inbreeding of isolated populations.
The effectiveness of corridors

Simberloff and Cox (1987) and Lindenmayer (1994),
point out there has been a paucity of evidence
available to support or refute the values of
corridors as conduits for the movement of species.
Furthermore, information that is available has often
not been collected from properly designed
experiments, making it difficult to disentangle cause
and effect. For example, comparing two remnants
that are not connected by a corridor with two
remnants that are may be confounded by the
additional habitat provided by the corridor in the
second case and not just the fact that they are
linked.
The effectiveness of corridors is likely to vary with
a range of factors including habitat structure and
quality within the corridor, dimensions
(length:width ratio) of the corridor, the nature of
the surrounding habitat, human-use patterns and,
most importantly, the biology of the particular
species that are expected to use the corridor and its
surrounding habitat (Simberloff & Cox 1987;
Lindenmayer 1994). For example, highly mobile
species may be able to travel through or inhabit
modified land between remnant fragments, making
corridors non-essential to their survival.
The degree of isolation is species-specific and is
relative, not only to the biology of each individual
species, but also to environmental conditions
(Harris 1984). Dispersal abilities of individual
species play a key role in assessment of fragment
suitability, as well as identifying barriers to
dispersal (Goosem & Marsh 1997). Many studies
focus on single species, and largely on mammals
and birds (e.g. Andrn 1994, Laurance 1994, and
Goosem & Marsh 1997), and it is difficult to make
generalisations for a range of species based on
these. Landscape connectivity (e.g. wildlife
corridors) may be a useful management tool in
overcoming the impacts of isolation.
Bennett (1999) considers wildlife corridors as one

option of a number that contribute to managing the
entire landscape for connectivity. While corridors
can and are applied as a habitat conservation
measure in fragmented landscapes (Noss 1987),
they should not be used as an all-encompassing
panacea for fragmentation. In the absence of
detailed, species- and site-specific research, the
use of corridors should be mixed with other
measures and there is always likely to be a need to
retain larger areas of non-fragmented habitat.
Downes et al. (1997) found that wet sclerophyll
corridors in north-eastern Victoria provided useful
habitat for several mammal species, but that there
were intraspecific differences in habitat use by
brown antechinus (Antechinus stuartii). Specifically,
there was a higher proportion of males, and
individuals had lower body weight in corridors than
in forests. Thus fragmentation may lead to
reduction in fitness of isolated populations of some
species. This study demonstrated that, while
corridors can provide useful habitat for mammalian
assemblages, they might not provide a complete
solution to the problem of landscape fragmentation.
There has been some published and unpublished
data from Queensland suggesting wildlife corridors
do provide useful habitat in some situations. Work
in northern Queensland in Donaghys Corridor
(Atherton Tablelands), which is a revegetated strip
of rainforest linking Lake Eacham National Park and
Gadgarra State Forest, provides evidence that
corridors do provide for the movement of species
(Tucker 2000). Preliminary unpublished evidence
from genetic studies on Rattus fuscipes, Rattus
leucopus and Melomys cervinipes indicate that the
previously isolated populations of these species,
which occurred at each end of the corridor, are
distinctly different genetically. However, the F1
generation of each species has recently been
identified as being genetically related, indicating
that the corridor seems to be functioning as a
conduit for these species.
In a north Queensland survey of four species of
rainforest interior insects, Hill (1995) found that a
dung beetle species and butterfly species occurred
in linear corridors, but not in the surrounding
arable land. The remaining two species were
confined to the rainforest habitat. Hill (1997)
argues that emphasis should be placed upon these
interior (or edge aversive) species, because the
process of habitat fragmentation is likely to have
the greatest impact on such species. Use of
corridors by these species supports the need for
them for conservation purposes. Hill (1997) noted
that corridors were functioning as habitat for the
beetles rather than simply encouraging dispersal,
and that with corridors 200 m wide you get about
80% of the fauna present in a large habitat patch.
47
The study from central Queensland, summarised in

table 4.1, also investigated the effects of
connectivity of remnants on associated fauna
richness. Where a remnant patch or strip of
vegetation is linked to other patches of vegetation,
species numbers increased. This was especially
evident for bird species richness that increased
greatly when linear strips of vegetation connected
up with more extensive woodland areas. Regrowth
vegetation supported greater numbers of fauna
species than pasture sites. Pasture sites which have
been sown with the introduced pasture grass
Cenchrus ciliaris (buffel grass) generally had fewer
remaining ground-dwelling species (e.g. quails,
fossorial skinks and native small mammals) than
pastures which contained a mix of native grass
species (see further discussion on the effect of
reduced grass diversity and loss of biodiversity in
section 3.2).
From the above discussion, it is possible to say that

generally, wider and larger corridors or patches are
considered better for biodiversity conservation than
smaller and narrower corridors or patches (Hussey
et al. 1989), although the optimum width and size
will vary with the nature of habitats that form and
surround the corridor and the ecology of species
using the corridor (Noss 1987). For example, in
Western Australia, bird species richness in
woodland corridors on road reserves was
significantly influenced by the density of the
ground cover below 1 m and the density of
vegetation above 8 m. A study of birds in southeast Queensland open forest found that corridors
had to be at least 500 m for small forest birds
(Catterall et al. 1991). Hussey et al. (1991) suggest
rainforest corridors may need to be 100 m wide,
while in heath vegetation the minimum required
width might be only 30 m.
Corridors and patches, as remnants of once

widespread and complex vegetation associations,
are subject to species losses and changes in
ecosystem processes (Hobbs 1993b). Being linear,
corridors in particular suffer a relatively larger edge
effect (see section 4.1.3), so that damage by fire,
fertiliser drift, weed invasion, wind damage, insect
defoliation, nutrient enrichment from run-on,
microclimatic changes, hydrological changes, and
many other impacts, greatly affect their
sustainability (Hussey et al. 1989). Fauna using
corridors as habitat may be more susceptible to
predation by increased feral cat and fox
populations that are often associated with a
fragmented landscape.
4.1.3 Condition of vegetation

remnants
In coastal areas, vegetation is generally denser, and

edge effects are likely to result from intensive land
uses such as sugarcane cultivation, sown pastures
and urban and peri-urban subdivisions. Given the
extent of the development and the low rate of
retention of native vegetation, coastal corridors will
also have a major function as habitat and should
be made as wide as possible.
In inland areas, harsher and more frequent climatic
extremes and extended seasonal food deficiencies
mean that corridors need to be wider than coastal
areas. This is also true because the generally
sparser vegetation provides less protection for
animal species from predators. Population densities
may already be relatively low and the chances of
corridors becoming sinks for some species
relatively high. The loss of smaller insect-feeding
birds facilitates insect outbreaks that may lead to
repeated tree defoliation and eventual rural
eucalypt dieback (Ford 1986). In these areas, 200 m
may be a sustainable width, but variables such as
corridor length and grazing pressures also need to
be considered.
48
The effect of patch size is often confounded by the

relationship between patch size and condition. To
ensure both sustainable use and the long-term
viability of the landscape, knowledge of the
condition of remnants is essential. It is traditionally
accepted that remnant size, shape and proximity to
other areas of native vegetation are critical
variables affecting the persistence of native species
and the invasion by exotic species (Saunders &
Hobbs 1991). Other factors affecting the condition
and functioning of remnants include the type and
intensity of disturbances that the remnant has been
subject to and the vegetation type, which vary in
their levels of natural resilience and resistance to
change. Despite these influences, degraded
remnants still provide value in the landscape in
terms of property productivity and regional
conservation, although it is assumed that remnants
with limited modication are better able to provide
these values across the landscape.
Habitat value of small remnants is usually
compromised by changes in understorey structure
and composition caused by disturbances such as:
grazing, from domestic livestock and native
fauna
herbicide or pesticide spray drift
weed invasion, particularly from exotic pasture
species
native fauna population pressures from reduced
habitat
edge effects
alteration of fire regime (Saunders et al. 1991;
Barret et al. 1994; Abensperg-Traun et al. 1996b;
Smith et al. 1996).
Apart from biological consequences of
fragmentation, there are physical consequences to
fragmentation. Alterations in radiation, wind and
Ecosystem function is greatly impaired as remnants

reduce in size and particularly as their edge-toarea ratio increases. Deterioration due to edge
effects is the greatest threat to stability of small
remnants or wildlife corridors. This impact of
habitat edges on the viability of biodiversity in
remnants has become an enormously complex
aspect of fragmentation research and has sparked a
plethora of investigations into edge effects (e.g.
Laurance & Yensen 1991; Turton & Freiberger 1997;
Didham 1997). In its earliest conception, edge
effects were quantified in a ratio of perimeter length
to area (see figure 4.2), in an attempt to quantify
size and shape variation (Laurance & Yensen 1991;
Didham 1997). Assessment of the ecological
impacts of edge effects by the core-area model
(Laurance & Yensen 1991) uses edge penetration
distance to calculate the unaffected area of a
fragment of any shape or size for focal taxa.
Linked large remnants are likely to provide more
viable habitat at the regional scale than many small
fragments with a high edge-to-area ratio (Cale &
Hobbs 1994). The nature and impact of the edge
effects will be greatly influenced by the nature of
the adjacent land use and the corresponding
strength of the edge effect (Soule & Gilpin 1991).
Dorricott et al. (1998) have demonstrated edge
effects in the southern brigalow belt (see figure 4.3).
A sustainable remnant will have two zones: the
outside areas that are affected by edge processes,
and an inner or core area. Fragments must be wide
enough to ensure that an ecologically viable core
area is sufficiently distant from the edges to reduce
the impact of edge effects (Start 1991).
The utility of corridors as habitat is often reduced
because their linear nature makes them prone to
degradation by disturbance. Corridors also must be
wide enough to ensure there is a large area in the
middle that is not impacted by edge effects (Start
1991). Corridors must be managed with specific
objectives in mind. Weeds have the potential to be
the most serious threat to corridor integrity and
must be addressed. Similarly, pests, vermin and
feral animals may also live in corridors, and it is
important to control problem species. Fire
management must be considered, especially when
the dominant tree species is fire sensitive (e.g.
mulga Acacia aneura). Similarly, management
practices and operations, especially stock handling
and mustering, have to be taken into consideration
in developing appropriate strategies for overall
management of corridors.
150
Effective natural habitat (ha)
water fluxes can all affect populations within

fragments. Changes in microclimate are especially
noted at the edge where original habitat meets
cleared matrix (Saunders et al. 1991; Laurance &
Yensen 1991) and, whilst the effect of this is
unknown, it may result in invasion by shadeintolerant or secondary species (Lovejoy et al. 1986).
no edge
effect
100
circle
50
1:5 strip
1:10 strip
50
100
150
Area of remnant vegetation block (ha)
Figure 4.2 The effect of shape of retained vegetation on the

area of natural habitat within that vegetation. Natural
habitat is defined as that part of the block greater than 75 m
from the nearest boundary. The difference between the
1:1 line and the particular configuration line is an indicator
of the area of edge habitat. Source: Scanlan et al. 1992.
Size, shape and edge effects

10 ha remnants
Indicates edge effects
for a difference of 25 m
Indicates effective
undisturbed habitat
Undisturbed
area 7.5 ha
Undisturbed
area 7 ha
Circular remnant
total edge=1121 m
Square remnant
total edge=1265 m
Undisturbed area 4.5 ha
Long narrow remnant
total edge=2200 m
Figure 4.3 Showing how size and shape impact on edge

effects. Source: Dorricott et al. 1998.
49
4.1.4 Impacts of domestic grazing

within remnant vegetation
As highlighted in section 4.1.1, the greatest threat
to biodiversity in Queensland is loss and
degradation of habitat associated with continued
broadscale vegetation clearing (Scanlan & Turner
1995; EPA 1999c).
Broadscale vegetation clearing, however, is not the
only contributor to loss of biological diversity, with
overgrazing by domestic stock commonly accepted
as a significant factor contributing to the
degradation of remnant and riparian vegetation
(Foran et al. 1990; Morton & Price 1994).
According to the State of the Environment Queensland
1999 report (EPA 1999c), grazed woodlands have
undergone considerable structural changes since
the arrival of domestic stock, with evidence that
many areas support increased unpalatable woody
plant density and biomass. Elsewhere in Australia,
there is a growing amount of evidence to indicate
that domestic grazing has impacted greatly on the
natural environment and its associated biota (e.g.
Hobbs & Hopkins 1990; Morton 1990; Christie
1993; Kirkpatrick 1994; Wilson & Clark 1995;
Landsberg et al. 1997a, 1997b and 1997c).
A review of the impacts of grazing in wooded
ecosystems in south-eastern Queensland, recently
undertaken by an Ecologically Sustainable Forest
Management (ESFM) review panel (McDonald et al.
1999), suggested that the cumulative impacts of
grazing were poorly studied and understood. It is
likely that this has broader applicability across the
State of Queensland. Notwithstanding, stakeholders
in the south-east were of the opinion that if
properly managed, grazing may be compatible with
flora and fauna conservation, particularly in
grasslands (McDonald et al. 1999). Furthermore,
the results of long-term grazing experiments in the
northern spear grass region by CSIRO support the
contention that moderate levels of grazing pressure
by domestic livestock and conservation of native
plant diversity can be largely compatible (EPA
1999c). It is prolonged and continual overgrazing,
however, that is considered to be the primary
source of degradation and loss of biodiversity of
remnant vegetation.
Impacts on flora
Domestic stock are suspected, directly or indirectly,
of impacting on the flora of remnant vegetation
through grazing, browsing or rubbing of vegetation,
soil compaction and erosion, eutrophication of
water sources, altered nutrient status of soils,
spread of weeds, and altered fire regimes (FERA
1998). The effect of grazing in remnants depends on
the type and intensity of grazing (Fensham 1998b),
the predominant season grazed (Pettit et al. 1995),
and management activities associated with grazing,
such as fire regimes and tree treatment. Also of
50
importance is the location of watering points, and

the establishment of tracks, fence lines and other
infrastructure, such as yards and buildings.
Braunack and Walker (1985) found that grazing
altered the structure of both gradational texture
profile and duplex profile soils within remnants of a
semiarid poplar box (Eucalyptus populnea) woodland
at Wycanna, southern Queensland. This may be
attributed to the loss of ground cover, resulting in
soil erosion and subsequent nutrient loss (Braunack
& Walker 1985). However, an increase in the input
of faecal matter from domestic stock may
compensate for this by supplementing nutrients and
increasing soil pH as was demonstrated in a study
of sheep in Western Australia (Scougall & Majer
1991).
Other changes resulting from altered soil structure
include soil compaction and/or surface seal
formation, and the inability of plants to germinate,
grow or survive (Braunack & Walker 1985). In a
study in Western Australia, Scougall and Majer
(1991) found that soil moisture was increased by
grazing, largely because of a decrease in the
abundance of plant cover. As a result, less water
use and increased compaction occurred in the
upper surface layers, leading to greater soil water
retention. (See section 4.2.4 Soil Structure.)
Changes in species composition

The most direct effect of grazing within remnant
vegetation is changes in the species composition of
the plant community (Friedel & James 1995;
Scanlan & Burrows 1990). Continual, heavy
domestic grazing within remnants can rapidly
reduce the abundance of palatable ground-layer
plant species, including regenerating seedlings of
canopy species. Preferential grazing of these
palatable species leads to a general increase in the
abundance of unpalatable (grazing-tolerant)
species (Yates & Hobbs 1997; Prober & Thiele
1995; Cheal 1993). Palatable shrub foliage within
reach is also browsed. Palatability of species may
vary according to season, age of plant, location, or
the type of grazing (e.g. cattle and sheep). As such,
the response of the plant community to domestic
grazing is very complex.
The introduction of exotic pasture plant species
into Australia with agricultural expansion has
added a further layer of complexity to the effect of
grazing on remnant vegetation. Clearing
applications indicate that the vast majority of land
clearance in Queensland is directed at the
establishment of buffel grass pasture. Franks et al.
(2000) express their concern over the expansion
and incursion of exotic pasture species into the
remnant vegetation of Queensland, particularly the
north African perennial, buffel grass (Cenchrus
ciliaris). They suggest that the life-history traits
sought in successful screening of pasture species
are also the traits that make these species potential
weeds of remnants. Once established within

remnants, these exotic pasture species alter the
character and functioning of the plant community
in several key ways. The most readily observed
result is a reduction of diversity and abundance of
native plant species, particularly grasses and herbs
(Fairfax & Fensham 2000). Buffel grass poses great
problems to the managers of national parks
because of its capacity to change fire regimes
(R. Fensham 2000, pers. comm. 29 March). The
local loss of native species, coupled with the
invasion of exotic pasture species, has been
observed as a response to grazing in a number of
studies (Pettit et al. 1995; Abensperg-Traun et al.
1996a, 1996b and 1998; Prober & Thiele 1995;
Cheal 1993).
Fenshams (1998b) study on the Darling Downs
demonstrated that species richness was generally
greater in moderately or heavily grazed sites than
in sites lightly grazed, although responses varied
with vegetation type. McIntyre and Lavorel (1994)
found no significant difference in exotic species
richness at different grazing intensities. McIvor
(1998) demonstrated that whilst changes in
diversity of both exotic and native pastures changes
with site and year, his results clearly show that the
introduction of sown species, particularly with
cultivation, significantly reduces the density of
native species. McIvor expresses some concern at
the implications of these changes for the
productivity and stability of these pasture systems.
The importance of investigating this impact in
different environmental contexts is emphasised by
Prober and Thiele (1995), who noted that livestock
grazing appeared to have played a more significant
role in degrading remnant quality in white box
woodland species, than fragmentation effects per
se. It must be remembered that all the direct effects
of grazing pressure occur under light grazing as
well as under heavy grazing. The time for the
effects to manifest under a light grazing regime is
greater than under moderate to heavy stocking
rates (Hussey & Wallace 1993).
In a study on the ecological condition and
functioning of remnant poplar box (Eucalyptus
populnea) woodlands, it was found that any effects
associated with fragmentation were overridden by
prevailing domestic stock grazing regimes and other
land management practices. Those remnants that
received periodic or light grazing had higher native
species diversity and increased structural complexity
than those subjected to year-round, moderate to
heavy grazing. Again, the number of exotic species
did not vary greatly among stocking rates.
A number of significant changes were recorded,
with different grazing intensities for plant and
vegetation patch attributes in poplar box and
silver-leaved ironbark (E. melanophloia) woodlands
in central Queensland (Ludwig et al. forthcoming).
For example, the authors found that the cover of

clumps of native perennial grasses such as
kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra), black speargrass
(Heteropogon contortus), wiregrasses (Aristida spp.)
and bluegrasses (Bothriochloa spp. and Dichanthium
spp.), declined significantly with increased grazing
pressure, where as the cover of buffel grass
(Cenchrus ciliaris) clumps increased. Grazing had no
significant impact on tree grove, shrub thicket, log
hummock, and termite mound patch cover
attributes. However, in heavily grazed sites, tree
dieback was evident, and unpalatable shrubs (i.e.
Carissa ovata, currant bush) and bare ground
patches were more common.
Changes in habitat structure

Yorks (1998) studies on the impacts of grazing and
fire on forest biodiversity in New South Wales have
demonstrated that the structure of understorey
vegetation differs substantially between grazed and
non-grazed sites. Grazed sites had significantly less
ground herb cover and small shrubs, but the degree
of impact appeared to vary with geology and soils.
York (1999) further suggests that the effects of
grazing on forest structure may be patchy due to
cattle grazing occurring preferentially in more open
areas. Accordingly, York (1998) also reported that, as
sites become more open, grazing intensity increases,
resulting in a reduction in the amount of vegetation
in the ground herb and small shrub layers.
In a study of the impacts of cattle and macropods
on grazed woodlands in north Queensland,
Fensham and Skull (1999) found no significant
difference in basal area of eucalypts between native
and domestic stock grazing. However, the basal
area of non-eucalypt species was significantly less
in those sites grazed by cattle. The physical
location of the sites grazed by macropods naturally
excluded grazing by cattle and were presumed to
be burnt considerably less than those sites grazed
by livestock. Fire regime must therefore be
considered as a confounding variable, even though
fires can be considered part of domestic grazing
management and thus constitute part of the overall
effect. Nevertheless, it is generally believed that
grazing reduces the ability to burn because of
reduced fuel loads.
There is both anecdotal (Royal Commission 1901;
Inter-Departmental Committee 1969; Rolls 1981;
Allingham 1989; Joyce 1990; Simpson 1992; Tothill
& Gillies 1992; Harland 1993; Reynolds & Carter
1993) and empirical evidence (Burrows et al. 1985;
Burrows 1995) that woody plants have increased in
both density and biomass under grazing in
northern Australia since European settlement
(Tothill et al. 1982). Similar increases in woody
plant cover in grazed vegetation have been reported
in Africa, South America, India and North America
(see S. Archers web site bibliography for references
from several countries: <http://cnrit.tamu.edu/
rlem/faculty/archer/bibliography.html>).
51
Using historical data as well as 13C analyses,

Burrows et al. (1998) have shown that woody plant
thickening has occurred in the grazed woodlands of
north-eastern Queensland. It is suggested that
these woodlands were maintained as a fire
mediated subclimax prior to the introduction of
domestic livestock. Altered fire frequency and direct
effects of reduced cover on increasing soil water at
depth have contributed to the increase in woody
cover. They reported tree basal area growth
increments of 21 0.03 m2/ha/yr (mean of 47
established diverse sites) for eucalypt species in
Queenslands grazed woodlands over a mean nineyear period with some plots from the early 1980s
(with a focus on central Queensland). Broadly
similar rates of increase in grazed woodlands have
been reported in North America and southern
Africa (S. R. Archer 1999, pers. comm.,
16 November; R. J. Scholes 1999, pers. comm.,
16 November).
The vegetation structure of rangelands in Australia
has great relevance to the pastoral industry
because of the inverse relationship between the
abundance of trees and grass (Burrows et al. 1990).
The real possibility that the density of the woody
component of woodlands is increasing is thus of
grave concern for that industry and has been a
prime motivation for the mechanical clearance of
vegetation. There is little doubt that stocks of
woody vegetation can undergo considerable flux.
The open question is whether these fluxes are the
result of normal climatic cycles, the result of cattle
grazing through the inverse relationship between
wood and grass, changes in fire regime, or
feedback resulting from the primary cause of the
greenhouse effect, namely CO2 fertilisation.
Fensham and Holman (1999) have recently
demonstrated that dieback collapses can
undoubtedly result from extreme drought events.
Finally, it is important to note that remnant
degradation may occur through removal of grazing
as well as prolonged overgrazing, by forcing
changes to vegetation structures (House 1997).
Periodic grazing within remnant vegetation allows
some control of exotic pasture species that, without
grazing, would come to dominate the herbaceous
layer and displace native species. This leads to a
loss of species diversity and changes in habitat
structure, and can alter the ecological dynamics
within remnant vegetation.
Impacts on fauna
Literature on the effects of grazing on native
vertebrate and invertebrate populations in Australia
is limited. Abensperg et al. (1996a, 1996b), in the
wheat belt of Western Australia, used sheep faecalpellet density (as a proxy of grazing intensity) and
percentage cover of weeds to allocate disturbance
categories on arthropod abundance. This study
found sheep faecal-pellet density and lichen cover
52
to be the most important habitat indicators for the

abundance or richness of scorpions, termites and
beetles, but not for spiders, isopods, cockroaches
or earwigs.
Scougall and Majer (1991), in the Western
Australian wheat belt, compared 23 biological
variables between grazed and non-grazed
remnants, including a survey of the ant fauna. They
found that the species of ants changed significantly
between the grazed and non-grazed remnants, as
an indirect result of grazing exclusion. They
concluded that domestic stock activity within
remnants compacted the soil to such a degree that
this selected for those species of ants that were able
to cope with the altered soil structure. The changes
in species and numbers of ants also affected the
dispersal patterns of many native plant species.
Bromham et al. (1999) found that invertebrate
species composition between grazed and nongrazed remnants also varied. The less abundant
orders, such as cockroaches, millipedes, centipedes,
springtails, beetle larvae and scorpions, showed
highest representation in non-grazed remnants.
Arnold and Weeldenburg (1998) studied the effects
of remnant size and grazing on recorded bird
species. Although the mean number of bird species
present in grazed patches was less than in nongrazed patches, the difference was attributed to
remnant size. Stock have also been suspected of
destroying sheltered sites important to feeding and
roosting by the black-breasted button-quail Turnix
melanogaster, although it is likely that this effect is
exacerbated during times of drought (Flower et al.
1995). Preliminary investigations into the impacts
of broadscale tree clearing and grazing on
vertebrate fauna in central Queensland found that
although tree clearing and grazing interacted, the
removal of trees had the greater impact on fauna
(Ludwig et al. forthcoming).
Rare and threatened species

Endangered, Vulnerable or Rare (EVR) species are
generally very susceptible to disturbance, due to
low population numbers, restricted ranges or a
declining population. It is for these reasons that
EVR species should be considered separately when
attempting to manage the effects of grazing on
native flora and fauna.
Little is known of the impacts of grazing on EVR
species. For example, of the 205 EVR species (plant
and animal) in Queensland considered in the Fauna
and Flora Information System (DNR 2000),
13 species are considered to be threatened and
84 species are possibly threatened by grazing.
Management recommendations for these species
tend to be precautionary, based on best available
knowledge.
Effects associated with watering points

Grazing impacts are greatest close to artificial
watering points, and decrease with distance from
these points (Foran 1980; Andrew & Lange 1986a
and 1986b; Landsberg et al. 1997a and 1997c;
James et al. 1999). Changes cited by James et al.
(1999) across the arid zone include:
the development of a zone of extreme
degradation around the water (up to 0.5 km)
where soil crust is broken, erosion is high, and
unpalatable plants dominate
an increase in the number of unpalatable
perennial shrubs beyond the extreme
degradation zone, particularly in semiarid
woodland and arid shrubland habitats
a decrease in abundance of palatable native
perennial grasses, due to selective grazing. These
changes near water can cause a decline in
perennial plant diversity and in fauna dependent
on such vegetation such as grasshoppers
(Ludwig et al. 1999).
The positioning of point water sources on the edge
of remnants creates further problems in the
effective management of these areas. The
concentration of stock to a point water source
rapidly degrades the remnant condition
immediately adjacent to these areas, with the
effects decreasing as the optimal foraging range
increases (James et al. 1999). With many properties
currently with (uncontrolled) artesian water,
converting from linear (bore drains) to point water
sources as a means of water management, there
appears to be some merit in maintaining existing
bore drains. Primary among these is the
distribution of domestic stock impacts across the
broader landscape rather than a concentration on
the edge of remnants.
The removal of established artificial watering points
may have effects on species composition and
abundance and may threaten vulnerable species. In
areas where water supplies are limited the
implementation of artificial watering points may
increase the range of grazing animals other than
domestic stock, exacerbating impacts caused by the
latter (James et al. 1999). This form of altered
composition and possible changes in abundance of
fauna in areas containing artificial watering points
may have profound effects on flora at the
ecosystem level, as well as immediately adjacent
the watering point.
Grazing in riparian areas

The effects of stock grazing on remnant riparian
vegetation in Queensland are of particular concern,
as vegetated buffers are required by legislation to
be left around watercourses after clearing. Hancock
et al. (1996) nominated grazing as one of the
foremost environmental problems threatening
riparian plant species diversity in Western
Australia, but did not provide data to support this.
Bennett (1994) suggests that remnant riparian

vegetation in the northern plains of Victoria
supports the greatest diversity of bird species when
compared with other remnant vegetation types. He
indicates that riparian vegetation supports a greater
density of birds and arboreal marsupials than all
other remnant types. Bennett expresses concern
with current grazing management on privately
managed riparian sites, implicating grazing as a
cause of remnant degradation.
Effects of continual grazing of riparian zones
include the elimination of, or reduction in, canopy
species due to the prevention of regeneration
(Fleischner 1994; Smith 1988). Fleishner (1994)
indicated that grazing may alter riparian vegetation
in four main ways:
1) by compaction of soil (increasing run-off and
decreasing the water available to plants)
2) by removal of herbaceous species
3) by physical damage to vegetation by rubbing,
trampling and browsing
4) by altering the growth form of plants, through
removal of terminal buds and stimulation of
lateral branching.
Eutrophication of water and trampling of important
breeding sites for amphibians are of particular
concern.
Conclusion
Studies suggest that the effect of grazing on the
condition of remnant vegetation is not always
benign. Overgrazing and poor land management
practices for grazing appear to have the greatest
impacts, especially on floral composition, the
extent of weed invasion, habitat structure and the
diversity of wildlife communities. Significant
impacts appear to occur within the vicinity of
watering points, due to the prolonged use of
remnant vegetation by stock. Furthermore, the
seriousness of impacts is variable across the
landscape and through time.
Land managers possess some of the tools and
knowledge necessary to carry out responsibilities
toward the ecologically sustainable management of
Queenslands natural resources. For example,
together with this review, current research, the
availability of models to predict safe carrying
capacities (e.g. Johnston et al. 1996), and effective
monitoring (see section 6.2), the efficacy of grazing
management regimes and their impacts on the
condition of forests can be assessed.
4.1.5 Ecosystem repair and

management
The decision to retain areas of native vegetation for
biodiversity values may not automatically guarantee
the continuation of biodiversity. Reduction of
vegetation clearing to ensure no net loss of native
vegetation within Australia by July 2001 (CIE 1999)
is one aspect of the national goal of native
53
vegetation management, others may also include

assessing and monitoring the condition of the
remnant, and managing the remnant to achieve the
goals sought for the area (this may include
production, wildlife and biodiversity
considerations). As the National Framework for the
Management and Monitoring of Australias Native
Vegetation (Commonwealth of Australia 2000)
becomes firmly established, the focus across the
State will be upon how remnant vegetation and the
ecosystems of which they are part is managed. We
will want to know how we can best improve the
condition of what is left and strategically increase
native vegetation cover in Queensland. Managing
for biodiversity may include active measures to
manage and repair ecosystem function. Areas, such
as riparian zones, play an important role in the
function and structure of streams, and influence
water quality and stream bank stability (Campbell
1993). Due to their poor condition, the management
of riparian zones in Queensland has now become a
major conservation issue (Sattler 1993b).
The best management of these areas also requires
detailed consideration for the protection of
biodiversity. The management of retained
vegetation on lands used primarily for production
will obviously not usually be identical to the
management of areas set aside primarily for nature
conservation (e.g. national parks). Grazing (e.g.
grasslands on the Darling Downs (Fensham
1998b)) and thinning (e.g. mulga woodlands
(Cameron & Blick 1982)) can be compatible with
maintaining the majority of biodiversity values of
vegetation in some cases.
Pre-European condition may represent a good
indicator of management requirements for
biodiversity in some cases, particularly with respect
to fire management. However, management is best
determined by an assessment of the impacts of
management against the requirements of
biodiversity. For example, poplar box (E. populnea)
and yellow jacket (E. intertexta) woodlands in the
Dirranbandi area are considered by many
landholders to be in an unnatural state because
their dense shrubby understorey is believed to have
replaced a naturally grassy ground layer. The
absence of this understorey may be associated with
an increase in native herbaceous species richness
but it can also be associated with an increase in
the abundance of the exotic buffel grass, Cenchrus
ciliaris. Central to considering management of
remnant areas is understanding the relationship
between surrounding and concurrent activities, and
functioning of the remnant. Of particular
importance in Queensland is the impact of
domestic grazing on remnants.
54
Any strategic approach to ecosystem repair must

consider the appropriate vegetation management
techniques, the conservation priorities for a
particular regional ecosystem, and the cost of
implementation of any repair programs. There are a

number of national and State policies and programs
that support vegetation management (e.g. The
National Framework for the Management and
Monitoring of Australias Native Vegetation
(Commonwealth of Australia 2000) and the bushcare
program). In addition to this there is also a national
Rehabilitation, Management and Conservation of
Remnant Vegetation Research and Development
program which has been funding research projects
aimed at improving the management of remnant
bushland. Only a small proportion of the established
research projects occur in Queensland (Price & Tracy
1996). The Department of Primary Industries is the
principal State agency responsible for woodland
research in Queensland and has developed
sustainable production systems for various native
vegetation communities.
The Department of Natural Resources provides
funding principally to the Queensland Forestry
Research Institute for a range of ongoing vegetation
management research projects. A number of
universities and State departments around Australia
are engaged in vegetation management research
projects. There is a strong case for the need to
establish a Cooperative Research Centre for
Vegetation Management which has, as part of its
focus, the task of determining the most effective
techniques for broadscale vegetation management
and ecosystem repair. Landcare is a high-profile,
national program of ecosystem repair and
restoration.
Some local governments have intensive ecosystem
repair programs (e.g. Brisbane City Council and
Gold Coast City Council). The success of these
programs largely depends on a large pool of willing
volunteers, strong financial position, and small
public areas in need of attention. In rural areas of
Queensland, such efforts must overcome small
population densities, vast areas of private land with
potential for repair, and a low economic and
technical capacity by both the local government
and landholders to engage in such work.
There are a number of land management techniques
that may be used to promote ecosystem health and
repair. A strategic approach to the repair of regional
ecosystems may involve the reclamation,
rehabilitation and restoration of the landscape using
regeneration, revegetation and other vegetation
management techniques (for clarification of the
meaning of these terms, see box 4.1).
Revegetation is commonly identified with ecosystem
repair strategies. The expense and relatively limited
and sometimes questionable impact of revegetation
means that strategic approaches are required.
Hobbs (1993a) has presented an initial framework
for developing revegetation strategies that include
the use of buffer zone, corridors and additional
habitat areas. The Bushcare program, for example,
is the largest component of Natural Heritage Trust
McLoughlin (1997) has identified and distinguished between 19 terms related to working in natural areas
ranging from nine variations of the term regeneration through restoration, reinstatement, reconstruction,
reclamation, rehabilitation and fabrication. Often used as if they are synonymous, these various ecosystem
repair terms may be more basically differentiated as:
Reclamationrevegetation using a range of species without attempting to reinstate the original
vegetation (Lamb 1994). (This commonly used meaning differs markedly from McLouglin 1997).
Reclamation normally involves claiming or reclaiming land for human use, and in Queensland this term
often applies to activities such as the reclamation of severely disturbed landscapes (e.g. mines), but can
also refer to the drainage of natural coastal mangroves for urban development.
Rehabilitationrevegetation with species that are economically and ecologically suited to a site,
possibly including locally native species (Lamb 1994). Rehabilitation is commonly practiced as a
requirement for mining leases where the principal aim may be to return the area to grazing.
Restorationrevegetation using only the original locally native species (Lamb 1994). Restoration is an
attempt to restore an original ecosystem and must honestly be acknowledged as an attempt only
(McQuillan 1998). As ecosystems are impossible to define precisely, restoration is an indefinite goal that
aims to achieve a fully functioning ecosystem without reaching that final point. Restoration projects
attempt to re-establish all identified ecosystem elements such as the known fauna and flora species and
abiotic factors. Only locally indigenous plant species are allowed to regenerate or to be reintroduced,
with a preference for locally collected seed.
Regeneration is a technique that draws upon the extant soil seed banks and various seed dispersal and
germination mechanisms to increase the amount, and sometimes the diversity, of vegetative cover.
Regeneration activities may use a number of means of achieving this, including intentional variation of
fire, grazing and weed management strategies and silvicultural treatments. For example, fire can be a
powerful and yet subtle tool for ecosystem manipulation. The absence of fire, reduction in fire
frequency, heat of the fire and season of occurrence of a fire event have resulted in dramatic changes in
the structure and composition of vegetation communities in many parts of Queensland. Considered
alteration of these fire regimes can also be expected to have positive results. The active management of
areas of depauperate remnant vegetation using the appropriate application of this suite of land
management activities is likely to be a priority across many regional ecosystems.
Revegetation is the intentional re-establishment of native or exotic vegetation in an area using
regeneration, planting or some other technique. When planting is required, there are at least five key
decisions that can influence the resultant vegetation community. These are: selection of plant species,
matching species to each environmental location within a site, deciding upon planting density, selecting
combinations of species and structural mix, and mulching decisions (McLouglin 1997). Direct seeding
has been identified as a very cost-effective technique for revegetation (Boyle 1998; Vanderwoude 1993)
and has been increasingly adopted and adapted for broadscale revegetation projects. The outcomes of
direct-seeding activities can be affected by species selection, seed germination characteristics, soil
condition, site preparation, and post germination site management (Sun & Dickenson 1995).
Box 4.1 Definitions and descriptions of ecosystem repair terminology.
and nationally will have allocated $346.5 million

over five years, to protect and restore native
vegetation to conserve biodiversity and restore
degraded land and water (CIE 1999). While the
bushcare program will achieve a number of other
outcomes and revegetation is only one approach, it
is projected that this expenditure will revegetate
only 150 500 ha (CIE 1999). The most effective
techniques for broadscale vegetation management
will need to be identified to achieve significant
levels of ecosystem repair in Queensland.
Just as the combination of geology, geomorphology
and climate have resulted in a large number of
distinct regional ecosystems across Queensland,
there are likely to be specific differences in the
condition, conservation imperatives and
management options which apply to a given
regional ecosystem or group of regional

ecosystems. Tongway and Ludwig (in Jenkins
1996), for example, suggest that rehabilitation of
degraded rangelands for both restoring production
and overcoming land degradation may be achieved
by thinning mulga and leaving patches of branches
to create a mosaic of retained vegetation and fertile
areas of pasture. While some resources have been
developed to provide management advice for
specific types of ecosystems such as rainforest
(Kooyman 1996; Goosem & Tucker 1995), the
differences between various ecosystems necessitate
research into new resources to support ecosystem
repair efforts. Significant work still needs to be
done to provide adequate and efficient management
information across the diverse Queensland
landscape that delivers significant levels of
ecosystem repair.
55
4.1.6 Vegetation with particular

ecological and catchment
values
4.1.6.1 Riparian zones
Riparian lands are that part of the landscape
adjacent to streams that exert a direct influence on
stream or lake margins, and on the water and
aquatic ecosystems contained within them.
Riparian land includes both the stream banks and a
variable sized belt of land alongside the banks
(Karssies & Prosser 1999).
Riparian vegetation performs a range of functions:
stabilising stream banks against erosion
reducing delivery of sediment, nutrients and
other pollutants to streams
controlling plant growth in streams
providing terrestrial habitat and wildlife corridors
providing aquatic food and habitat through
provision of leaf litter, logs, shade etc
dissipating flow energy and in the process reaerates the water reducing the erosional capacity
of the water.
The importance of this zone for the protection of
biodiversity and other natural resource values is
being increasingly recognised (Bunn et al. 1993).
Recent establishment of a national research
program by the Land and Water Resource Research
Development Corporation (LWRRDC) and State
partnership agreements with the Cooperative
Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology and the
Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater
Ecology, focusing on the ecology and management
of riparian zones in Australia, give testament to
this interest.
It is clear that riparian zone vegetation contributes
significantly to long-term channel stability and
integrity. For example, research on the Nambucca
Catchment in northern New South Wales (Doyle et
al. 1999), indicates that the disastrous state of the
river system is due to a combination of factors,
including the removal of riparian vegetation,
artificial channel straightening, and removal of
large woody debris. Elsewhere in Australia,
significant funding is now being provided to reestablish cleared and degraded riparian zones (e.g.
Murray River of Green project). In Queensland, a
number of specific riparian vegetation projects
occur as well (e.g. Wet Tropics Tree Planting and
the Mary River Incentive Scheme). The roles of
riparian vegetation highlighted are significant and
must be incorporated into riparian vegetation
management considerations. In many areas, the
remnant riparian zones are presently not wide
enough to provide adequate fauna corridors, so to
encourage retention of the remaining vegetation,
the benefits may be confined to those listed above.
56
Riparian zonesmaintaining stream bank

stability
Riparian and in-stream vegetation strengthens and
protects stream banks against mass-failure and
erosion, adding to bed and bank stability through
both live vegetation and the dropping of large
woody debris into the channel. The roots of woody
vegetation increase the shear resistance of soils by
providing additional apparent soil cohesion
(Abernethy & Rutherfurd 1999a). Even low root
densities provide substantial increases in shear
strength compared to non-root-permeated soils
(Abernethy & Rutherfurd 1999a). By helping to
drain water, riparian trees can more than double the
resistance of degraded bank sections to slumping.
Vegetation also reduces direct rainsplash impact
and bend over during floods to dissipate energy and
directly protect soil. The presence of large woody
debris within the channel increases bed and bank
resistance, dissipates energy and physically protects
the material in the bed and banks.
Work by Abernethy and Rutherfurd (1999b)
suggests that the effects of tree roots may be up to
a tenfold increase in cohesion close to the trunks of
riparian trees, falling to about a twofold increase
under the drip line. Mature trees, with longer and
more firmly anchored roots, provide more
reinforcement than younger trees.
The width of vegetation required for stability
depends on the channel dimensions and the
erosional forces in play. Intact vegetation with all
structural layers is required to offer the fullest
protection. The overstorey has the greatest influence
over the processes of mass-failure, with shrubs and
grasses on the bank face and aquatic plants at the
bank toe influential in controlling scour.
Riparian vegetation interacts with a range of
geomorphological, geotechnical, hydrological and
hydraulic factors to affect the type and extent of
riverbank erosion. Abernethy & Rutherfurd (1999b)
calculated that for stability purposes only, the
following minimum riparian zones are
recommended: basic allowance (5 m measured onto
the floodplain from the bank crest) + height
allowance ( height of the bank measured vertically
from the toe to the bank crest). It is important to
note that these recommendations consider only the
physical requirement for bank stability, and do not
include consideration of the width required for
long-term viability and sustainability of the
vegetated zone or the contribution such areas make
to wildlife habitat.
Bank erosion is a natural process. Given enough
time, even fully vegetated natural streams erode
back and forth over their floodplain (Abernethy &
Rutherfurd 1999b). The recommendation above
does not include an allowance for this.
Riparian zoneswidths for buffering

sediments and nutrients
Riparian lands have the potential to buffer streams
from hill-slope sediment and nutrient transport.
Experiments in northern Queensland have shown
that grass riparian buffer strips can trap more than
80% of incoming bed load on planar slopes, even
under heavy tropical rainfall (McKergrow et al.
1999). Recommendations resulting from these
investigations include that grass filter strips be
provided for about 5 m on the landward side of any
riparian zone and adjacent to agricultural activity,
as the grass is effective in capturing sediment.
The contamination of waterways from fertilisers
and pesticides as a result of excessive or
inappropriate usage is a major concern in some
areas, particularly within the MurrayDarling
Basin. Well-vegetated riparian zones can trap
sediment and associated nutrients and pollutants
by spreading and slowing water flowing through
them towards the watercourse (Barling & Moore
1993). Factors such as vegetation type and density,
soil type and moisture content, the intensity of
rainfall, and the slope and the width of the riparian
zone, affect its ability to do this. With respect to
vegetation type, density at the ground surface is the
most important characteristic. Forested filter strips
will be more effective where trees do not prohibit
an understorey of dense grass through shading or
competition. This is only likely in semiarid and
subhumid environments where there is incomplete
canopy cover (Karssies & Prosser 1999).
It is important to note that nutrients and pollutants
in solution will only be reduced through infiltration
into the soil profile. Soil properties, antecedent
moisture conditions and the amount of run-off
affect infiltration. Riparian lands are the wettest
part of the landscape and, when fed by soil
moisture generated from upslope, may stay close to
saturation for long periods. It is only in the semiarid areas of Queensland, where soil moisture is
low, that infiltration is likely to be significant in
absorbing nutrients. Filters of the order of 10 to
30 m width are required to absorb run-off under
dry antecedent conditions and greater widths are
required where converging flow drains through a
narrow zone (Herron & Hairsine 1998, as quoted in
Karssies & Prosser 1999).
Riparian zoneshabitat, maintenance of

biodiversity and wildlife corridors
Riparian zones along rivers, creeks and gullies are
an essential component of the landscape for the
maintenance of wildlife distribution, abundance
and diversity, and for the maintenance of in-stream
fauna (Sattler 1993b). Riparian zones act as
refuges, providing resource rich habitats necessary
for survival of (fauna) species during the course of
their normal lifecycles (Gregory et al. 1991; Bunn
1993), or in times of drought (Morton 1990). They
provide a rich and diverse habitat in their own right

(e.g. Catterall 1993). Therefore, riparian areas often
provide habitat for a disproportionately high
number of species relative to the proportion of the
landscape they occupy. For example, riparian areas
in the mulga and south-western brigalow regions in
Queensland (see appendix 4 of Neldner 1984)
contain the highest number of plant species (27%
of the total) compared to all other habitats, even
though they occupy a relatively small area (<10%
of the total area). Soft mulga land types are the
next richest broad habitat type, containing 20% of
the total number of species but occupying >20%
of the area. Similar patterns occur for flora and
fauna numbers in other parts of Queensland
(Boyland 1984; McFarland 1992; Catterall et al.
1992; Crome et al. 1994) and, at least for bird
species, in other parts of Australia (Recher et al.
1991; Loyn 1985; Gregory & Pressey 1982).
Though riparian zones have been extensively
cleared or degraded in many regions of
Queensland, significant areas of intact habitat do
remain (indicated by the status of riparian
ecosystem types). The importance of these zones
for the protection of biodiversity and other natural
resource values is increasingly being recognised
(Bunn et al. 1993).
Arthington et al. (1992) have summarised the
importance of riparian vegetation in the
development of linked habitat networks for regional
or catchment planning by:
forming corridors that link bushland remnants
into sustainable regional networks
providing critical habitat refugia within which
species are maintained in time of drought or fire
forming part of local habitat complexes which
sustain terrestrial wildlife
representing unique lowland communities
subject to threatening processes.
The significance of riparian lands for wildlife is
such that they should be regarded as ecological
arteries of the Australian continent, spreading as a
series of intricate interconnecting webs across the
landscape.
Ecological benefits of riparian vegetation

for in-stream fauna
Important ecological processes in upland streams
are largely dependent on riparian vegetation.
Proposed shading (by riparian vegetation) of 50%,
particularly in small catchments, will have a
significant improvement on ecological functions of
upland streams (Davies & Bunn 1999) and
improvements in upland streams (e.g. lower water
temperatures) may also protect downstream reaches.
Riparian vegetation provides an important source of
in-stream woody debris in the form of fallen logs
and trees. Woody debris can provide habitat for instream fauna, as well as increasing channel
roughness, and hence decreasing velocity and
57
associated stream power (Cohen 1999). Marsh et

al. (1999) showed that in the Albert River,
Queensland, 78% of large woody debris (LWD)
pieces were associated with some form of habitat
scale morphological effect, whereas in Cooper
Creek system, morphological effects of LWD were
low (11%). This shows that in some systems,
particularly those with higher energy, LWD has a
vital role in habitat provision (this may be in the
form of forming a scour hole, forming bars,
providing a bank scallop, etc.).
Loss of riparian vegetation has in part resulted in
the decrease in in-stream woody debris. For
example, existing levels on the lower
MurrayDarling basin may be only 15% of preEuropean settlement levels. Appropriate levels of
coarse woody debris are crucial for the ecological
health of floodplains (MacNally & Parkinson 1999).
Riparian zone dimensions

Riparian zones vary enormously in size depending
upon their position within a river catchment (e.g.
gully head versus a lower reach of a river system).
In lower parts of the catchment, the riparian zone
increases in size, usually incorporating wetlands
and significant areas of floodplains. Widths of
vegetation required in riparian areas will therefore
depend on the position in the catchment and the
functions that the riparian zone is required to
perform. Different functions will often require
different widths of vegetation. These areas are very
productive and important wildlife habitat; they are
very important to grazing livestock as well.
Research in Queensland (Catterall 1993) and
overseas (Spackman & Hughes 1995) indicates that
to be effective these corridors need to be of
substantial width, particularly for avifauna. As an
overseas example, for mid-order streams, minimum
widths of 75175 m were needed to include 90% of
bird species (Spackman & Hughes 1995). In southeast Queensland, corridors greater than 200 m
wide have been recommended (Catterall 1993).
Riparian zones should be multi-functioning, which
will then necessitate the adoption of the widest
width recommendation and should:
include the ecotones between aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems along streams and
adjoining wetlands and lakes
incorporate appropriate buffers to enable
protection of these ecotones from disturbance
from such factors as fire and weed invasion
be sufficiently wide to maintain stream bank
stabilising functions and to allow for natural
changes in watercourse positioning within its
floodplain
enable the reduction of sediment, nutrients and
other pollutants from overland flow beyond the
saturated zone
contain sufficient ecological integrity to act as
effective wildlife corridors
58
be sufficiently wide to ensure the viability of the

riparian zone buffer.
Accordingly, it is appropriate for buffer width
standards to vary for gullies, creeks and rivers
rather than a set figure being applied, but the width
should be such as to ensure the viability of the
riparian zone buffer. Other factors that have to be
considered are the impact of riparian zone
corridors on management practices (particularly
mustering) and property operations (e.g. clearing of
declared weeds such as rubber vine (Cryptostegia
grandiflora)), and access to water for stock and
agriculture right up to the high bank.
4.1.6.2 Wetlands
Queensland has the most diverse array of wetlands
in Australia, due mainly to the States climatic
variation and seasonal variability. The biological
and hydrological values of natural wetlands are
recognised in a range of catchment and land
management strategies (e.g. MurrayDarling Basin
Catchment Management Strategy). Areas that
contribute to the conservation value of wetlands
can be protected under the Vegetation Management
Act 1999 (Qld).
Although wetlands are most commonly thought
of as occurring where land and sea meet (e.g.
mangroves and estuaries), natural wetlands occur
in a range of landscapes including basins (e.g.
lakes), flat lands (e.g. swamps), and floodplains
(e.g. billabongs), or where the watertable intersects
the surface (e.g. springs).
Wetlands have been broadly defined as areas of
permanent or periodically/intermittent inundation,
whether natural or artificial, with water that is
temporary or permanent, static or flowing, fresh
brackish or salt, including marine areas the depth
of which at low tide does not exceed six metres
(EPA 1999c).
For the purposes of vegetation management, other
researchers have taken a narrower view, for
example floodplain wetlands (Hillman 1997) or
coastal wetlands (Zeller 1998). Wetlands can, to a
very large extent, be viewed as ecotones, that is,
transitional zones between terrestrial habitats and
deepwater aquatic systems (Boon & Bailey 1997).
Typically, wetlands include areas that show
evidence of adaptation of soils or vegetation to
periodic waterlogging (EPA 1999d). This provides
for areas subject to saturation through periodic or
seasonal rise in the watertable, as well as
depressions or channels filled from overland flow.
Such areas may be bare of vegetation, be covered
with sedges or other aquatic vegetation, or be
forested, for example wetlands with Melaleuca spp.
or Eucalyptus coolabah woodland (e.g. EPA 1999a).
The values and functions of wetlands have been

documented by numerous studies (e.g. Queensland
Government 1999) and include:
playing a key role in supporting the diversity and
abundance of wildlife
contributing significantly to the economic
productivity of the State by providing water
resources for (primary) industry; vital breeding,
nursery and harvest sites for edible fish,
molluscs and crustaceans; and areas of pasture
for stock.
Away from the coastal delta and lowland wetlands,
floodplain wetlands become significant features in
the landscape, both ecologically and hydrologically.
For example, the arid river floodplain systems of
the Lake Eyre Basin are geomorphically,
hydrologically and ecologically complex, and might
be described as a series of extensive and widely
dispersed, predominantly ephemeral wetlands,
rather than as rivers in the conventional sense
(Morrish 1997). The diversity and values of inland
wetlands are discussed in Wetlands of SouthWestern Queensland (EPA 1999a).
The flood-pulse concept (Junk et al. 1989) has
highlighted the significance of floodplain
productivity in providing organic carbon for the
biota of lowland rivers (Hillman 1997; examples in
Timms 1997 and 1999; Puckridge 1997). Because
of their distinctive aquatic biota, in comparison
with their river, and because their spatial and
temporal variability creates a mosaic of habitat
conditions, billabongs represent a significant
contribution to biodiversity to floodplain river
ecosystems, and also contribute to biodiversity
beyond their boundaries (Hillman 1997). Briefly
inundated wooded swamps in inland Queensland
have been documented as having significant
conservation values for bird life, frogs, fish and
mammals (EPA 1999a).
The major factors altering plant communities in
wetlands are water regime and grazing (Brock
1997). There is surprisingly little detail on the ways
domestic stock and feral animals influence the
ecology of wetlands in Australia (Walker 1993;
Bacon et al. 1994). However, it is clear that stock
can have direct impacts on wetland vegetation,
soils and water quality (Robertson 1997), and that
they impact directly on faunal communities and the
biogeochemistry of wetlands by altering habitat
structure and patterns of primary and secondary
production in and around wetlands (Robertson
1997). By altering wetland vegetation structure and
biomass, sediment chemistry and water column
nutrient concentrations, livestock and feral grazers
also contribute to shifts in the quantities and
chemical quality of materials available for transport
from floodplains to rivers during flood periods
(Robertson 1997).
Soil mobilisation, nutrient enrichment, and
controlled burning are obvious factors associated
with the pastoral industry. Other factors, such as

modification of pasture grasses (e.g. by thinning
through grazing or planting of exotic grasses
(Bullen 1993)) and construction of ponded
pastures, can significantly affect the ecology or
hydrology of wetlands (Boland 1997). In addition,
particularly on the eastern coastal plain, large
areas of freshwater wetlands have been lost or
degraded by clearing, draining, and exotic weed
invasion (Zeller 1998). For example, in coastal
areas in the Johnstone, Moresby and MulgraveRussell river catchments between 1952 and 1992,
forested wetlands and sedgelands decreased in area
by between 48% and 82%, due to clearing for
grazing and agriculture (EPA 1999b).
A significant factor in maintaining the ecological and
hydrological functions of a wetland is the provision
of a buffer zone of riparian vegetation, as for rivers
and watercourses. Appropriate widths for buffers or
riparian zones vary depending on their purpose. For
example, a filtration buffer for water quality could
be as little as 10 m (Karssies & Prosser 1999), while
buffers up to 2 km wide could be required to
maintain groundwater quality in certain situations
(Van Waegeningh 1981; Davies & Lane 1995).
4.1.6.3 Marine and adjacent coastal

vegetation communities
Mangroves
Mangroves are trees and shrubs tolerant of
intermittent flooding by salt water, living in the
intertidal zone between Mean Sea Level and
Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT), bordering the
banks of estuaries and foreshores along protected
parts of the Queensland coastline (Zeller 1998).
Areas of deposition of silt and mud at the mouths
of rivers and creeks and in the lee of larger offshore
islands (e.g. Hinchinbrook, Curtis, Fraser or North
Stradbroke islands), protected from strong wave
action, support the most extensive mangrove
communities (Dowling & McDonald 1982).
Saenger (1995) estimated 3424 km2 of mangroves
occurred in estuaries, while Galloway (1982)
estimated the total area of mangroves in
Queensland to be 4602 km2. Approximately 90% of
Queenslands mangrove forests lie in the tropics
(Robertson & Alongi 1995).
In general, mangroves vary in height with rainfall
(MacNae 1966), and in species diversity with
latitude (Lear & Turner 1977), varying from over 30
species on Cape York Peninsula and the Wet Tropics
to seven in Moreton Bay. Queenslands tropical
mangrove forests are among the most productive of
any mangrove system worldwide (Hutchings &
Saenger 1987) while, under certain conditions,
primary productivity of subtropical mangroves may
exceed that of tropical systems. A suite of factors
(including soil pore salinity, nutrient supply and
water balance under dry weather conditions) may
cause variability in primary productivity between
59
locations and among mangrove species in the same

location (Clough 1992).
It has been estimated that 75% by weight of the
Queensland commercial fisheries catch is derived
from species dependent on shallow marine habitats
(e.g. estuaries) for at least part of their life (Quinn
1992). Mangroves, seagrasses, and adjacent
saltpans and marine couch areas are all part of the
ecosystem that sustains this industry.
The importance of the tidal wetland (mangroves,
saltmarshes and clay pans) and its connected
freshwater wetland (melaleuca wetlands, palm
forests, sedges and lagoons) ecosystem, both for
fisheries and for shoreline protection, has been
widely acknowledged (Hamilton & Snedaker 1984;
Quinn 1992; EPA 1999d). However, extensive
clearing, draining and filling of these wetlands for
agriculture, industry or urban development, and
separation of estuarine systems from adjacent
freshwater or riparian habitats has had a major
impact on fisheries values in some areas (e.g.
Tait 1994; Russell & Hales 1994; Zeller 1998).
Other coastal vegetation
Coastal vegetation varies considerably in both
structure and species composition, depending on
the substrate and hydrological regime. Coastal
vegetation communities range from spinifex and
coastal she-oak communities on the foredunes, to
closed littoral forests usually in swales behind
foredunes, to tall open forest, such as satinay
forests, on deep sands. Intertidal (mangrove)
forests, salt flats with chenopod herbfields and
marine couch grasslands, swamp oak and
sedgelands, melaleuca forests, or sometimes closed
forest with palms, occur on heavier or poorly
drained soils.
Native vegetation in the coastal zone is important
because it:
maintains biological and ecological processes
is biologically diverse
provides habitat for protected wildlife and
migratory species covered by State legislation or
international agreements
maintains river and estuary bank stability and
shades water bodies, reducing light and
temperature (factors in weed and algal growth)
minimises soil erosion, siltation and pollutant
run-off into waterways and estuaries
maintains the watertable and catchment areas
that provide water suitable for domestic
consumption
can assist in beach accretion on dunal areas
through trapping windblown sand (EPA 1999b).
Land clearing has affected most of Queenslands
coastal zone to some degree. This clearing has been
for agricultural purposes, but more recently for
urban and tourist development particularly in
south-east Queensland. Clearing constitutes a major
pressure on the biological resources of the coastal
60
zone and is continuing (EPA 1999a). Many of these

ecosystems rely on a healthy vegetation cover for
stabilisation against wind or water erosion, invasion
by exotic weeds and subsequent degradation of the
system. Changes to vegetation cover are associated
with changes in hydrology, increased risk of dune
instability, wind erosion and tidal inundation, and
loss of natural values (EPA 1999b).
4.2 Land degradation

4.2.1 Tree decline and dieback
Dieback is commonly associated with general tree
death resulting from a wide range of causes. It is
symptomised by deterioration of the primary tree
crown that may lead to total defoliation and
subsequent repeated bursts of epicormic regrowth
along the main branches and trunk (Landsberg
1990; Landsberg & Cork 1997). The plants
carbohydrate reserves are reduced if these
subsequent flushes of secondary growth are lost,
and death may ensue (Podger 1973; Gall &
Davidson 1981).
Tree decline relates to noticeable reductions in tree
population health over time (Kile et al. 1980). The
term includes the more apparent problems of
dieback, senescence and mortality as well as the
inability of a tree population to effectively
regenerate from seed stock or vegetative propagules
(Neale 1981).
Occurrences
Dieback symptoms have been recorded in a wide
range of species with considerable regional
variation in relative susceptibilities (Landsberg et al.
1990; Williams & Nadolny 1981). Most individuals
are eucalypts, but this may reflect the prominence
of the genus in the Australian woody flora.
Wylie et al. (1993) provide a detailed assessment of
the incidence of dieback in Queensland, and
conclude, in part, that dieback in southern and
central Queensland was most severe in landscapes
where more than 50% of original tree cover had
been removed. Serious land degradation (erosion
and salting) have also been recorded in areas of
high tree loss (Firth et al. 1984; Shaw et al. 1986;
Woods 1983).
Localised studies of dieback have been conducted
of riparian areas of the Condamine (Voller & Eddie
1996) and Macintyre catchment (King 1995).
Fensham and Holman (1999) observed tree death
as resulting from drought in north Queensland.
Anecdotal reports of dieback associated with insect
plagues or unseasonal weather events have been
recorded from inland areas of the State, while
incidence of patch death in rainforest areas of far
north Queensland have been attributed to
phytophora root disease.
Causes
Many potentially damaging factors have been
suggested as possible causes of dieback, but
relatively few of these have been extensively
investigated (Landsberg & Wylie 1991). While it has
been possible to identify single causal agents in
some regions (e.g. Hughes (1984) showed that
dieback of many eucalypts in the Lockyer Valley was
due to secondary salinisation), single causal agents
are more likely to be the exception than the rule
(Landsberg & Wylie 1991) (see figure 4.4). Dieback
does, however, appear to be particularly severe
where intensive farming production is the main land
use (Wylie & Johnston 1984). The recruitment of
native trees into these landscapes may be limited,
where cultivation for establishing improved pastures
kills seedlings, and natural seedling regeneration is
prevented by associated increases in stocking rates
(Ford et al. 1993; Reid et al. 1998). In the absence of
natural regeneration, sown pastures over the whole
of a property may result in either a perpetual
commitment to planting trees or the eventual loss of
trees from the landscape.
Insects
While many factors (including waterlogging and
mistletoe infestation) probably cause localised
incidents of tree death, repeated defoliation by leafeating insects is the single factor most frequently
cited in reports of rural dieback (Old et al. 1981;
Wylie 1986, Landsberg et al. 1990; Reid & Landsberg
1999). For example, anecdotal accounts of severe
defoliation by cup moths in Charters Towers were
observed in 198991 (J. C. Scanlan 2000, pers.
comm., 13 April).
Dieback trees are often more heavily damaged by
insects than healthier nearby trees (Landsberg &
Wylie 1983; Landsberg 1988; Landsberg et al.
1990; Mackay et al. 1984). Control of insects on
dieback trees (Mackay et al. 1984) or branches
(Landsberg et al. 1990) can lead to rapid recovery
or regrowth.
Detailed studies of insects and dieback have been
restricted to south-east Queensland and the New
South Wales tablelands (Wylie et al. 1993;
Landsberg & Wylie 1983; Mackay et al. 1984). Reid
et al. (1998) described the relationship between
insect population dynamics and dieback in New
England. They concluded that, while clearing
removed mature trees as a food source for insects,
pastures provided an increased food supply for
larvae. Increased insect populations subsequently
consumed epicormic regrowth, depleting tree
nutrient reserves (Reid et al. 1998).
Although insect damage is often associated with
dieback, this association is not universal. Where it
does occur, there is some evidence to show that
chronic defoliation may be the ultimate cause of
dieback, but may have been accelerated by other

factors, such as climatic stress (Sutherst & Mo 1997)
or human intervention (Wylie 1984).
Salinity
Salinity has frequently been associated with
dieback (Old et al. 1981). Tree death associated
with dryland salinity was first observed in valley
floors in south-eastern Queensland in the 1920s,
and has since been reported with increasing
frequency to affect a variety of eucalypt, Casuarina
and Callitris species in south-eastern and central
Queensland (Wylie & Bevege 1981).
Where dieback is associated with salinity, salt may
be a primary cause of dieback or predispose trees
to other agents, such as chronic defoliation by
insects. In the Mary River catchment, a close
association between the occurrence of salinity,
dieback and insect damage was demonstrated
(Wylie & Johnston 1984; Wylie 1986).
Nutrient enrichment
Pasture improvement has lead to substantial
increases in soil nutrient levels (Russell 1986).
Redistribution of nutrients by livestock through
manure and urine can lead to very high
concentrations of nutrients near trees (Russell
1986). Insect-related dieback has been associated
with very high levels of soil and tree nutrients and
enhanced growth of defoliating insects. Landsberg et
al. (1990) demonstrated a causal link between high
plant nutrients and the enhanced insect damage.
Pathogens
Several species of fungi have been implicated in stem
cankers and crown dieback in eucalypts (Davidson &
Tay 1983; Old et al. 1986; Shearer et al. 1987). Some
of these fungi can spread rapidly in branches of
defoliated trees and are nearly always associated
with insect defoliated trees (Beckmann 1989).
Virulent soil borne pathogens such as Phytophora
cinnamomi (Old 1979), armillaria (Kile 1981) and
leaf pathogens (Palzer 1981), have caused locally
severe and sometimes widespread dieback and
death of vulnerable species.
Senescence
Senescence could be a primary cause of dieback or
a predisposing factor towards it in some, but not
all, dieback affected regions. Many of the trees left
after initial clearing are now old, and in areas
where regeneration is slow, dense pasture and
grazing can suppress regeneration, and whole
stands of rural trees may now be senescent
(Landsberg & Wylie 1991; Voller & Eddie 1995). In
areas where natural recruitment of native trees is
no longer occurring, many of the extant trees
inevitably develop apparent dieback symptoms as
the population ages.
61
intensification of
land management
increased
livestock
production
climatic
fluctuations
planting of
exotic pastures
fertiliser
application
ringbarking
and poisoning
competition
physical
damage to
stems and roots
deterioration of
soil physical
structure
loss of habitat
for predators
and parasites
improved
soil nutrition
improved
nutritional
quality of
tree foliage
tree stress
increased
groundwater
salinity
soil
acidification
increased
populations
of root-feeding
larvae
tree death
production
of epicormic
foliage
increased local
populations of tree
feeding insects
chronic defoliation
pathways based on
the results of research
more speculative
feedback pathways
feedback pathways
sunlit
foliage
increased
exposure of
remaining
tree canopies
physical
damage
dieback
Figure 4.4 A conceptual model of the complex interaction of factors generally associated with tree death and decline. Adapted
from Landsberg & Wylie (1991).
Drought
Waterlogging
Several very severe droughts have been associated

with leaf wilt, leaf shedding, bark splitting and
some death of severely stressed trees (Ashton et al.
1975; Palzer 1981; Pook et al. 1966; Fensham &
Holman 1998). Fensham and Holman (1999) used
extensive historical accounts of dieback and rainfall
records to confirm extensive tree death following
past droughts in the Queensland savanna.
Waterlogging has also been posed as a cause of

initial tree decline, again facilitating insect attack.
However, this theory has not been experimentally
tested, and evidence is mostly anecdotal (Reid &
Landsberg 1999). For example, tree decline has
been observed on the New England tablelands
following tree ringbarking during the midlate
1800s (Norton 1886, as cited in Reid & Landsberg
1999) and tree death occurred following the 1974
Brisbane floods (Wylie & Bevege 1981). Reid and
Landsberg (1999) suggest that, in the case of the
New England tablelands, tree clearing for pasture
improvement may have led to increases in soil
moisture where subsurface water flow created by
an impermeable B-horizon in duplex soils resulted
in water saturation at lower slopes and valley
floors. In some cases, flooding increases the
establishment of woody species (e.g. coolibah and
the exotic weed Parkinsonia aculeata).
Protracted dieback of drought-affected trees may

result if stem-boring beetles invade injured stems
(Hoult 1970). Landsberg and Wylie (1983) recorded
a worsening of rural dieback in south-east
Queensland during a period of severe water stress.
If there is no insect infestation, full recovery of
surviving trees generally occurs in the following
wet season.
Mistletoe, arboreal wildlife

There have been localised occurrences related to
very high populations of mistletoes and or arboreal
wildlife such as brushtail possums (Pitman et al.
1977; Nadolny 1984; Loyn & Middleton 1981;
Statham 1992; Voller & Eddie 1995).
62
4.2.2 Pest invasions

The management of woody vegetation has a
dramatic impact on associated organisms. (The
impact on native flora and fauna is generally
considered in section 4.1.) In this section, the

relationships between woody vegetation
management and the occurrence of undesirable
plants and animals (pests) are considered.
The best strategy to reduce the impact of pests is to
prevent their establishment initially. This requires
recognition of pest organisms, and action to remove
any of these before establishment of a selfsustaining population. The use of washdown
facilities for vehicles and machinery moving from
parthenium weed (Parthenium hysterophorus) areas is
a good example of the prevention approach being
implemented in Queensland (Walton 1999).
The cost of rehabilitating areas infested with weeds
is often very high and, in many cases, the costs
exceed the value of the land on which the pests are
located (Scanlan 1986). In some cases, attempts in
rehabilitation are sound and justifiable on simple
economic grounds, while in others it is not. For
example, the recent efforts in controlling Quilpie
mesquite (Prosopis velutina) can be justified on the
basis of protecting large areas lower in the
catchment, whereas it would never make economic
sense to control mesquite solely on the basis of
recovering lost productivity (B. Toms 2000, pers.
comm. 21 February). At the other extreme, it is not
justifiable to make a large scale effort to control
Lantana camara in Queensland (other than by
biocontrol), because it has largely reached its
potential distribution (Swarbrick et al. 1995).
However, in many areas, the recovery of lost
production may exceed the cost of treatment and
could be justified.
Plants
Even apparently undisturbed native vegetation has
generally been disturbed to some degree or another.
The disturbance could take an indirect form (e.g. a
change to historical patterns of fire), or a more
direct form (e.g. grazing by domestic livestock). In
either case, a change in the composition of the
understorey vegetation may occur. For example, the
reduction in fire can lead to an increase in
understorey Acacia spp. and an increase in size of
Eucalyptus spp. saplings (Burrows et al. 1990).
Grazing can lead to a reduction in ground cover and
a great increase in the opportunity for herbaceous
and woody species (either native or exotic) to
establish. The importance of grazing management
in the control of parthenium weed, an introduced
herbaceous species, has been acknowledged
(Navie et al. 1996).
Managed forestry areas would initially appear to be
areas that do not have serious weed problems.
However, this is not necessarily the case,
particularly when there is not a full tree canopy. In
south-east Queensland, areas of Pinus spp.
plantations are a major reservoir of the introduced
woody weed Baccharis halimifolia (Armstrong &
Wells 1979). However, dense shade under fully
developed canopies can inhibit the development of

this weed (Panetta 1977).
Integrated management of native vegetation to
reduce its susceptibility to invasion and enhance its
regeneration is required (Humphries et al. 1991).
Total clearing of tree cover provides an excellent
opportunity for weeds to establish. For this reason,
many landholders have planted exotic pasture
species in an effort to get a rapid cover of
competitive species that are useful for grazing
purposes (DPI 1976). Buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris)
is perhaps the most widely planted pasture species
that fits into this category. In cases where pasture
species have not become established, herbaceous
weeds can be serious (Anderson et al. 1983). One
of the best examples was the dense stand of
parthenium weed that established in pulled
blackwood (Acacia argyrodendron) and gidgee
(A. cambagei) scrubs in the Clermont region of
central Queensland in the 1980s in cases where
buffel grass was not planted or did not establish
(Anderson et al. 1984).
The planting of pasture provides another possible
source of weeds. There are two aspects of pasture
planting that must be consideredcontamination by
known weeds and planted species becoming weeds.
Contaminated pasture seed brought into Australia
from the USA was the source of parthenium weed in
central Queensland (Navie et al. 1996). Currently,
the federal legislation dealing with contaminants
specifies zero tolerance for seeds of plants known to
be weedy elsewhere or under active control in
Australia. Control of the movement of weeds in
pasture seed is currently under consideration in the
review of the Rural Lands Protection Act 1985 (Qld).
Among the proposals being considered is that the
sale or movement of any product containing a
serious weed that is not currently established in
Queensland will be prohibited. Also, the sale of
products containing an established weed will be
prohibited for selected weeds. There is also a
proposal for a general duty of care to prevent the
establishment and spread of pests. Note that if
pasture seed is purchased interstate, the sale must
conform to the rules that apply within that State.
Thus it is possible for seed to be purchased from
another State that has seeds of weeds that are
declared in Queensland, in it, provided it is legal to
sell the seed (with its contaminants) in that State.
A number of pasture introductions have become
serious weeds, either in the agricultural sector
(Lonsdale 1994) or in natural ecosystems
(Humphries et al. 1991; Lonsdale 1994). Since
August 1998, all species proposed for importation
into Australia have been subjected to the Weed Risk
Assessment (WRA) system by the Australian
Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS). The
WRA utilises a series of questions to assess the
weed potential of a species on the basis of
available information on its current weed status in
63
other parts of the world, climate preferences and

biological attributes. Proponents are encouraged to
supply this information for their candidate species.
A generally increased awareness of unintended
consequences of plant introductions should greatly
reduce this avenue of weed introduction.
An area that is often overlooked is the impact of
infrastructure development and housing on the
establishment and spread of pests. Weeds like the
exotic creeper Thunbergia grandiflora, grow up trees
on the edges of rainforests in northern Queensland.
This plant can smother crowns of trees up to 40 m
high and can progressively destroy rainforest,
moving from the edge inward (Humphries et al.
1991). These edges commonly occur along roads
that have been built through the rainforest. In
south-east Queensland, there are woody vines
(e.g. cats claw creeper (Macfadyena unguis-cati) and
Madeira vine (Anredera cordifolia) (Swarbrick 1999))
that thrive on edge vegetation caused by
infrastructure development. Invasive trees, such as
camphor laurel (Cinnamomum camphora) and
Chinese celtis (Celtis sinensis) may also gain
footholds on the edges of clearings.
An emergent effect of the clearing of vegetation has
been the increased fragmentation of remnant
vegetation, which increases its vulnerability to weed
invasion. While most weeds may be restricted to
the outer edges of remnants, edge effects are
particularly prominent in small remnants that have
high edge:area ratios (see section 4.1.2). Vegetation
corridors are particularly difficult to protect from
weed invasion (Panetta & Hopkins 1991). Remnants
close to population centres may be subjected to
high levels of disturbance from human activity
(Matlack 1993), which can lead to degradation
above and beyond what occurs at remnant edges.
Animals
Animals (e.g. pigs) can become pests as a direct
result of land management in a similar manner as
weeds, but usually less dramatically. Some
introduced animals appear to have established and
spread rapidly, irrespective of the type of land
management, for example rabbits (Oryctolagus
cuniculus) (Williams et al. 1995) and cane toads
(Bufo marinus). Also, many introduced herbivorous
mammals have become feral (goats, deer and horses
(Braysher 1993)), especially in semiarid areas where
large property sizes preclude their removal.
64
Land management practices have increased the

numbers of some native species although, in
general, the impact of European settlement has
been to greatly reduce native mammals. An oftquoted example is that of macropods in inland
areas. Their numbers are generally acknowledged
as having increased due to the provision of
permanent water and the encouragement of good
pastures for domestic livestock (Newsome 1975;
Poole 1978).
Pest management and tree clearing

Clearing of trees can alter the presence, absence
and demographics of individual faunal populations,
creating pest problems. For example, the removal of
trees along watercourses and from the general
landscape has allowed grass to thrive in many
sugarcane growing areas. An unintended
consequence of this has been that the cane rat
(Rattus sordidus) has greatly increased. The slashing
of all accessible grassy areas and the replanting of
trees in such areas is being promoted as an
effective means of reducing the numbers of cane
rats. The removal of harbourage for rabbits (hollow
logs, blackberry (Rubus fruticosus)) is a vital aspect
of controlling their numbers in the Stanthorpe
Wallangarra area of southern Queensland.
Trees may also have to be cleared to assist in
removal of some pest weeds. Rubber vine
(Cryptostegia grandiflora) is a serious weed from both
production and environmental perspectives
(Humphries et al. 1991). This scrambling or
climbing shrub can grow up and over large trees
along watercourses in north Queensland (Tomley
1995). In some cases, the only practical control
involved clearing some of the native trees over
which it climbs. This may be by clearing or by
burning these areas at a time and in a manner that
can damage the trees amongst which rubber vine
grows (Vitelli 1992).
The management of pest plants and animals may
involve planting trees or the removal of trees and
shrubs. The complexities of each organism and
each vegetationenvironmental combination must
be considered before designing management
practices aimed at reducing or preventing the
impact of pests (Commonwealth of Australia 1997).
4.2.3 Tree removal: implications for

soil processes and accelerated
soil loss
There is much anecdotal evidence to suggest that
the removal of trees results in the large-scale loss
of soil, or decline in soil processes. However,
evidence in the scientific literature is often
conflicting with regard to these processes. There is
considerable evidence that tree clearing in itself
does not necessarily initiate the degradation cycle,
but rather that inappropriate land management
practices are often the causal factors (e.g. Scanlan
et al. 1992). Quantifying and/or qualifying the rates
of soil loss or soil degradation across the State is
very difficult due to the complexity and diversity of
soil and plant interactions
Impact of trees on soil processes

Vegetation has an impact on soil fertility and
erosion, along with other long-term processes such
as salinity and soil acidification. Vegetation
influences the soil fertility through nutrient release
via litter fall and organic matter decomposition,
addition of nitrogen through fixation, acidification

via the secretion of acids from roots, and the
depletion of soil nutrients via plant uptake
(Anderson & Bell 1995). Enhanced soil fauna
populations associated with vegetation roots
perform a critical function in the cycling of
nutrients. Both macrofauna and micro-organisms
play a critical role in organic matter decomposition,
mineralisation and subsequent release of nutrients
(Swift et al. 1979; Morgan et al. 1989). Debate
exists as to whether the soil fauna populations vary
between pasture and natural forested ecosystems.
Erosion of soil occurs as a result of a transport
agent (wind or water) passing over or imparting a
force on the soil surface, or indirectly when water
has weakened the soil structure resulting in mass
movement (landslides and mudflows) (Rose 1993).
Tongway and Ludwig (1997) suggest that the
spatial redistribution of materials across the
landscape is influenced by terrain and vegetation.
Greater soil surface roughness (in the form of
perennial grass and hummocks) may allow greater
storage of soil water than smooth sites dominated
by ephemeral vegetation. Slope also influences the
transporting capacity of overland flows, with a
sudden decrease in slope causing slowing and
ponding of water and subsequently deposition of
material. Sudden increases in slope will increase
flow and mobilise soil particles. Aeolian (wind)
erosion is minimised with the presence of a
vegetative cover. A cover in the form of trees,
pasture and/or a litter layer, increases the surface
roughness resulting in an increased friction velocity
of wind (McTainsh 1993). This creates a boundary
layer that pushes the erosive wind higher from the
soil surface. In mulga lands, cover levels above
34% reduced wind erosion losses to 0.2 mm of soil
per year compared with bare trampled ground
which suffered from wind erosion losses exceeding
6 mm per year (Miles 1993). Thus the extent of
wind erosion is closely related to residual grass
cover levels.
Important factors controlling fluvial (water) erosion
at a point-scale are soil moisture status, amount
and intensity of rain, the soils water holding
capacity and infiltration rate, and the level of
surface cover. Management practices such as
grazing, fire and vegetation clearing can affect
surface cover and soil properties (e.g.
macroporosity) that control infiltration rate, thereby
potentially changing run-off. Also, changes to
vegetation can change the water use (e.g. time
pattern and depth of drying) and soil moisture
status, potentially affecting run-off. At a landscape
scale (e.g. hillslope and stream) run-off may be the
product of the point-scale run-off, and/or of
infiltrated water that returns to the surface/stream
via lateral subsurface or groundwater flow. Lateral
subsurface flow or groundwater may also create
wet zones in the lower parts of the landscape,
which then produce run-off during rain.
In their natural condition, most landscapes are

covered by vegetation that protects the soil from
erosion. Bache and MacAskil (1984) identify the
principal effects of vegetation in reducing erosion as:
the interception of the raindrops so that their
kinetic energy is dissipated by plants, rather than
imparted to the soil
increasing the frictional losses associated with
surface flows, and thereby reducing the erosive
potential and the transport capability
increasing the infiltration capacity of the soil,
thereby reducing the probability of overland flow
the physical restraint of soil movement.
Despite these protective mechanisms provided by
vegetation, few studies in Queensland have
investigated comparisons between uncleared and
cleared land systems. Data that is published
highlights the spatio-temporal variation
encountered by researchers. Those that
investigated the effects of removal of trees generally
found an increase of run-off as a result of the
clearing. However, researchers who investigated the
run-off rates of a forested block compared to a
pasture block often found that the pastures were
more efficient in minimising run-off.
Measurements of small catchments in Gayndah in a
silverleaf ironbark black speargrass community
on a granite duplex soil showed no significant
differences in run-off following clearing (Prebble &
Stirk 1988). Yet in small catchment studies of a
brigalow community in central Queensland,
clearing of brigalow scrub on fertile clay soils and
establishing buffel grass pasture was demonstrated
to increase run-off by 21 mm/year. Using historic
rainfall data in the PERFECT simulation model,
Littleboy et al. (1992) estimated that run-off
doubles from 3 to 6% of the annual water balance
with clearing (Lawrence et al. 1993).
A combination of neutron moisture meter studies
and simulation modelling by Williams et al. (1993)
predict that there would be an increase in run-off if
trees were cleared on neutral red duplex and red
earth soils in north Queensland. This is supported
by Dilshad and Jonauskas (1992), working on
similar soils in the Northern Territory. However, it
is contrary to the data collected by McIvor et al.
(1995), and the simulations of Scanlan and
McIvor (1993).
In a study of small plots in semiarid tropical
savannas of north Queensland, McIvor et al. (1995)
showed that soil loss from areas with native
pastures under trees was higher than for other
pasture systems (cleared areas, with or without
sown pasture). The soil loss from these pasture
systems were from 13 to 56% of that measured
from native pastures with live trees. Scanlan and
McIvor (1993), in simulation studies in the same
area, showed a reduction in soil loss of between
53% and 85% when trees were removed from
native pastures, with the actual figure being
dependent on stocking rate.
65
Investigating cover percentages as a controller of

erosion, Miles (1993) found that the average soil
loss due to water erosion for soft mulga was
4.16 t/ha/yr with 20% cover, compared with
1.1 t/ha/yr when cover was 40%. Comparable
figures for hard mulga were 6.57 t/ha/yr and
0.65 t/ha/yr.
A large proportion of rainfall intercepted by trees is
released again as large gravity drops. Moss and
Green (1987) found that these drops average about
5 mm in diameter making them more erosive than
almost all raindrops. Gravity drops from a height
range of 1.0 to 2.5 m reach a potential to cause
erosion with a gradual increase in erosive power
occurring up to 6 m of free fall. Protection from
gravity drops is best provided by vegetation on the
soil surface. Under natural conditions, forested
areas have a proportion of ground cover and forest
litter that minimise overland flow and enhance
rainfall infiltration. Pressland et al. (1991), Scanlan
et al. (1996), and Silburn et al. (1992) showed that
cover was able to reduce both run-off and soil loss
in grazed woodlands of north and central
Queensland respectively.
Soil cover, be it leaf litter or low vegetation, is
accepted by researchers as an important
component in minimising fluvial erosion. Soil
erosion and deposition models such as Universal
Soil Loss Equation (USLE) (Rosewall 1993)
incorporate surface cover as a subfunction of the
model. The USLE computes estimated soil loss from
a given site as the product of six factors whose
values at a site can be expressed numerically. The
equation is as follows:
A=RKLSCP
Where
A = Average annual soil loss in tonnes per hectare
R = Rainfall erosivity factor
K = Soil erodibility factor
L = Slope length factor
S = Slope steepness factor
C = Management factor
P = Support practice factor
The model demonstrates the interaction of these
different factors in soil loss. Table 4.2 highlights
how changes made in the percentage soil cover
alters the level of management control (C factor)
required to minimise soil losses. The C factor is
defined in the USLE as the ratio of soil loss from
land managed under specified conditions to the
corresponding loss from continuous tilled bare
fallow cultivation (Roswell 1993).
66
Slope also has a dominant influence on

susceptibility to erosion. Mass movement or
landslips may occur on steep slopes. Soil erosion
begins when intense rainfall breaks down
aggregates on the soil surface into small particles.
These small particles may be splashed into the air,
and on steep slopes this results in a net movement
of soil downslope. The steeper the slope, the
greater the risk of erosion. Velocity of overland flow

increases on steep slopes, and run-off is more
likely to concentrate and increase its erosive power.
In addition, the run-off rate is likely to be higher on
steep land. Slope length and slope gradient have
substantial effects on soil erosion by water. In some
landscapes, the slope steepens adjacent to drainage
lines, making such areas especially vulnerable to
soil erosion. Using the USLE, recommendations for
slope limits on development can be made to avoid
exceeding an acceptable level of soil loss (for
example, table 4.3 provides slope limits based on
the USLE to avoid average losses greater than
12 t/ha/yr).
The effect of trees on soils and pasture produce
contrasting effects on run-off and erosion in
woodland situations. The reduced pasture
production observed in eucalyptus woodlands of
northern (Gardener et al. 1990), central (Scanlan &
Burrows 1990), and southern Queensland (Walker
et al. 1972) would suggest that run-off and erosion
may be higher in grazed woodlands than in cleared
areas. This may be due to the lower pasture cover
in the former areas; however, the presence of tree
leaf litter can complicate this, as there tends to be
some buffering of the system. More trees may lead
to less pasture but increased leaf litter (Burrows et
al. 1990). Silburn et al. (1992) and Yee Yet et al.
(1999) found run-off was similar from pasture with
good cover and from under trees where cover was
mainly leaf litter. The surface porosity and depth of
the A horizon also tends to be higher under trees
(Dowling et al. 1986). Infiltration rates also tend to
increase below tree cover (Johns 1981), increasing
the amount of rainfall held in the soil, and therefore
not contributing to run-off.
Some researchers have found that it is the level of
litter cover that is important, and not tree cover
that minimises fluvial erosion. In central
Queensland (Silburn et al. 1992), run-off and soil
loss were both highly related to the proportion of
on- or near-ground cover, decreasing exponentially
with increasing cover, with only minor differences
between cover types (e.g. grass or tree litter) or soil
types studied. Annual soil losses from degraded
pasture were 1525 t/ha, equivalent to about 2 mm
depth of soil lost per year. Silburn indicated that
dense tree cover greatly reduced grass growth and
favoured poorer, shorter grasses that were not
favoured by stock. This absence of grazing enabled
soil cover to remain greater than 50%, thereby
offering protection to the soil. The tree canopy
cover of 2040% offered by the dense groves of
ironbarks was not considered to reduce erosion as
a result of gravity drops. Ironically, the 50% soil
cover that offered the erosion protection was due to
leaf litter from the trees. Tree litter may not persist
under heavy grazing. Simulation studies by Scanlan
and McIvor (1993) indicated that run-off was
reduced by between 37 and 60% when trees were
Table 4.2 Hypothetical example of management factors (C) for pasture lands with varying levels of canopy and surface cover
based on the USLE.
Canopy cover
Cover in contact with soil surface
Type and height
Per cent
cover
20
Per cent soil cover

40
60
C factors
80
95+
No appreciable canopy cover
0.45
0.20
0.10
0.042
0.013
0.003
Tall weeds or scrub. Average drop fall height of 0.5 m
75
0.17
0.10
0.06
0.032
0.011
0.003
Appreciable scrub. Average drop fall height of 2 m
75
0.28
0.14
0.08
0.036
0.012
0.003
Trees with no understorey. Average drop fall height of 4 m
75
0.36
0.17
0.09
0.039
0.012
0.003
Note: Assumes that cover at the surface is grass or a compacted organic layer.
Table 4.3 Slope limits (percentage) on pasture development

to avoid average soil loss rates exceeding 12 t/ha/yr based
on the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Source: Roswell (1993).
lead to high surface strength of soils impeding

seedling establishment (Arndt 1965; Bridge et al.
1983).
Rainfall erosivity
9000
7000
4000
2000
850
Low soil
erodibility K=0.015
18%
20%
30%
11%
19%
Medium soil
erodibility K=0.03
12%
14%
20%
7%
13%
High soil
erodibility K=0.055
8%
9%
14%
4.5%
8%
Heavy grazing may cause sheet erosion irrespective

of the presence of trees (Gardener et al. 1990), as
soil erosion in pasture land is greatly influenced by
the extent of surface cover on or near the ground
(Ciesiolka 1987; McIvor et al. 1995). The tree
canopy (>12 m high) does not necessarily
provide good cover for erosion control, due to the
formation of gravity drops (Moss & Green 1987).
Densely timbered areas may have either more or
less total cover of understorey plants and tree leaf
litter than a cleared site, depending on the species
involved (see figure 4.5). Trees compete directly
with grass for water and nutrients and, in all but
the monsoonal zones, this usually results in less
herbaceous cover under trees than in cleared areas
(Mott & Tothill 1984). Tree litter complicates this
effect. For example, in Eucalyptus populnea
woodlands (see figure 4.5a), there is a decline in
total ground biomass (tree leaf litter plus pasture),
as tree density increases due to the overriding
negative effect of increasing tree density on grass
cover. In Acacia harpophylla communities (see figure
4.5b), however, the highest total ground biomass is
at the highest tree densities due to the higher
relative production of tree litter. Ground cover is
further modified by the interaction of grazing
pressure, tree cover, use of fire and rainfall amount,
intensity and distribution, and the interactions
between these create a complex set of erosion
responses. Therefore, generalisations about tree
cover and surface soil erosion are not possible.
Soil cover
Pasture
80% cover
Pasture
40% cover
cleared from native pastures (at the same stocking

rate). The stocking rate had reduced the soil cover
in the simulations with trees to the point where
removal of gravity drops reduced erosion.
By contrast, in the Upper Burdekin River catchment,
McIvor et al. (1995) found that stocking rate had
little effect on reducing run-off. They demonstrated
that run-off was 50 to 70% lower under treatments
that were cleared (with either native or sown
pastures) compared with timbered areas (with
Eucalyptus crebra and Eucalyptus erythrophloia).
Mass movement can be triggered by such activities
as road works in mountainous regions or by
removal of trees from steep land, thus influencing
the water balance. Once the soil profile becomes
wetter than normal, the strength of the soil is
reduced, resulting in either a slow creep or rapid
movement of potentially vast quantities of soil
downslope (Rose 1993). Removal of trees from these
land systems can also result in long-term hazards
such as salinity and acidification. These issues are
dealt with in more detail in subsequent sections.
Management influences on trees and

soil loss
The method of clearing will affect the susceptibility
of soil to erosion. If trees are thinned by chemical
treatment, there will be minimal disturbance to the
surface vegetation thereby minimising the erosion
risk. Clear felling, however, initially exposes the
soil surface to higher surface temperatures that
break down organic matter and reduce aggregate
stability. Any associated mismanagement (such as
overgrazing), combined with raindrop impact, may
4.2.4 Soil structure

The physical condition of soil is a major
determinant of land condition, with immediate,
direct and indirect impacts on the potential
productivity of land for cropping, grazing and
timber production. Maintenance of soil physical
condition is vital if the productive capacity of land
is to be maintained.
The principal determinant and descriptor of soil
physical condition is soil structure. The negative
state of structure condition is structure
degradation, often termed soil compaction.
67
2500
Biomass(kg/ha)
2000
total
1500
pasture
1000
tree leaf
500
0
100
200
Trees/ha
300
400
Biomass(kg/ha)
6000
total
4000
tree leaf
2000
pasture
0
100
200
Trees/ha
300
400
Figure 4.5 Biomass of tree leaf and pasture within (a) poplar
box and (b) brigalow communities in Queensland. Source:
Scanlan et al. (1992) with data from Burrows et al. (1990)
and Scanlan (1991) respectively.
Structure degradation is one of a recognised suite

of land degradation types, commonly considered
ubiquitous to the worlds cropping and grazing
lands. Structure degradation has been ranked as
the greatest problem in terms of damage to
Australias soil resource (Williams 1998). It has a
very real impact on land profitability. As a cost
example, Fray (1991) states that soil structure
degradation alone has caused $144 million worth
of damage in the MurrayDarling basin.
Soil structure refers to the size, shape and degree of
development of soil units that are composed of
primary soil particles (sand, silt and clay), and the
arrangement of these units with the spaces (pores)
within and between them. Good soil structure,
typified by many interconnected spaces, is
important for the movement of water and gases in
the soil system and the proliferation of plant roots,
and is the prime regulator of water and nutrient
supply to plants. It is the loss of this pore space,
especially the interconnected pores, through
compression and shear, that best defines soil
structure degradation.
68
Soil structure degradation, as discussed here, solely

considers human-made degradation caused by
machinery and animals. Some soils do naturally
self-compact with no (or little) additional human
input, for example, hardsetting and crusting soils.
McGarry (1993) presents a schema of differences
between human-induced and inherent structure
degradation. Because of the inherent, negative

physical properties of the hardsetting and crusting
soils, the historical intensity of their use, and the
expectations of their cropping or grazing potential
have been relatively low (McGarry 1993, 1997).
Vegetation clearing, however, will put physical
pressure on these soils that are inherently,
physically fragile. So the potential for degradation,
even from low intensity usage, is high.
In terms of vegetation clearing, there are two
distinct management areas with strong potential to
cause soil structure degradation. The first is the
actual clearing process, most often with bulldozers
pulling either chains or subsoiling tines (for sucker
and root cutting). Then, the subsequent increased
stocking rates of sheep or cattle will give far greater
pressure on the soil physical environment,
particularly the all important topsoil layer. With
each, the level of negative effect is determined by
the soil water content at time of trafficking,
cultivating or trampling; moist to wet soil being
most vulnerable to structure degradation.
Though tree clearing will continue for land
development, sufficient knowledge on the causes
and processes of structure degradation exists that
preventative management strategies can be
implemented.
Considerable literature exists on the recognition
and management of soil structure degradation.
Most is from cropping land and timber plantations,
rather than native timbered land. However, the
underlying processes, effects, recording and
monitoring techniques, and preventative
management techniques are common.
Identification, diagnosis and rationalisation of
structure degradation are firmly based on the
description and measurement of soil structure
through soil profile description. The same set of
descriptive and/or quantitative assessments can be
employed to monitor and define subsequent
improvements in soil structure state with altered,
better management systems.
Extent and location

Difficulties surround the precise definition of the
extent and location of structure degradation. The
reason is that structure degradation principally
occurs in the upper subsoil and is hidden from view.
As a result, structure degradation is blamed for
many soil and crop problems that have no
immediately obvious cause. Conversely, many crop
failures due to structure degradation are wrongly
blamed on other factors, for example, root disease
and soil pathogens. With structure degradation,
most crops fail because their roots are unable to
penetrate a physical barrier. There may well be root
disease, but it is caused and exacerbated by the
waterlogging and poor root performance from
In terms of data collection toward defining the

extent and location of structure degradation, there
is currently no better method than visual
recognition of the phenomenon in a spade or
backhoe pit. Such observations are the basis of
SOILpak, a soil management decision-support
system (Daniells et al. 1996; McKenzie 1998).
Contributing factors
Soil water content at the time of traversing or
cultivating a soil is the principal determinant of the
severity and extent of soil structure degradation.
Tractor and caterpillar loads, implement design,
animal stocking rates, speed, and tyre size, type
and inflation are all important, but soil water
content is the prime determinant (Kirby & Blunden
1992). Soil water content at key times is
particularly important, for example during tree
clearing and when stocking rates are high, and the
water content at those times depends on climate
and current weather patterns.
Soil type is important in determining and
rationalising the severity of structure degradation.
This is for two different reasons. First, different
soils hold water for varying lengths of time. Some
soils remain more plastic, hence more degradable,
than others at similar times after similar amounts
of rain or irrigation. Clay soils tend to stay wetter
for longer as their fine particles hold more water,
more tightly than a sand or loam. Critical to the
interrelation of soil type and the potential for
structure degradation is a soils plastic limit water
content (PL). PL is the water content of a soil above
which it will compress and shear when loaded, that
is, the soil is in a plastic state and is prone to
structure degradation. Soil cultivated drier than PL
will fracture rather than smear so structure
degradation will not occur. Second, some soils are
inherently, physically fragile. In particular, soils
with large proportions of fine sand (but still with
enough clay to bind them) and low organic matter
contents tend to naturally hardset and form surface
crusts. With human inputs like tree clearing or
increased stocking rates, organic matter declines
further. Together with increased energy inputs
(animal hooves) this causes bonds between
particles to disintegrateleading to a worsened
physical condition.
The level of management awareness is potentially a
major contributor to the occurrence of structure
degradation. Imperfect understanding is the key
and occurs at many different levels. Especially up
to the late 1970s, primary producers lacked an
understanding and awareness of the physical frailty
of soil structure. There had been a European
paradigm for cultivationrepeated, deep,
cultivation of soil close to field capacity. Early
farmers, unknowingly, had assumed Australian
soils were as physically robust as European soils.
Adding to the problem, Australian farms are large.

This necessitates large machinery, gives inflexibility
in timing of cultivation, sowing and harvesting,
generally on a wide range of soils with different
levels of robustness. The problem is not that
farmers knowingly have over-used the soil, rather
they were unaware of the high level of care needed
to maintain the resource.
Though best for the soil, there are several
considerations that preclude cultivating and
trafficking at optimal (i.e. sub PL) soil water
contents. Specific to vegetation clearing, if large
areas are to be cleared to tight schedules, then
clearing will continue even after rain, despite the
soil being in a most vulnerable condition. The same
is true if stocking rates are raised after clearing.
After rain, animals cannot be removed from wet
fields, so they trample and puddle the wet topsoil.
This not only kills pasture but also seriously
degrades the physical condition of the topsoil,
causing problems with water infiltration and
pasture regeneration.
The impact of structure degradation

Soil structure degradation only increases the
potential for productivity reduction. The word
potential is stressed as crops and pastures can
grow well in structurally degraded soil, if there is
frequent irrigation or rainfall. The crop grows
almost hydroponically. However, when rain is
scarce, crops in structurally degraded soil will fail
long before crops in well-structured soil.
There are potentially high costs involved in both
forming soil structure degradation and then
initiating repair and control strategies. Cultivation,
traffic and animal hooves cause structure
degradation. Yet, on many occasions the aim of the
cultivation was to alleviate soil structure
degradation, or to open up land for improved
pastures. However, if the soil was too moist or wet
at the time of the cultivation, structure degradation
ensues. So the farmer is paying threefold: the cost
of the cultivation and traffic, and the cost of
negative responses (yield loss, increased irrigations,
poor seedbeds, etc.) that then require more
cultivation (with traffic) to repairagain running
the risk of producing more structure degradation.
This is a typical downward spiral associated with
As with some other land degradation (e.g.
accelerated soil loss), post-clearing activities may be
more significant in contributing to soil degradation
than tree clearing per se. In the case of soil
structure degradation, the impact of animal hooves
in new pasture may cause structural degradation.
For example, severe degradation of the soil surface
was located in a sown pasture on a shallow black
earth west of Moura in central Queensland (photo
in McGarry et al. 1999). The grazier reported poor
rain infiltration and poor pasture growth at this site,
69
despite the deep chiselling operation that preceded

sowing of the pasture. The cattle had trampled the
recently loosened soil by walking on wet or moist
soil, following rain. The outcome was poor water
infiltration and water ponding. In turn, this caused
the soil surface to remain wet for long periods of
time, so increasing the potential for structure
degradation as the cattle traversed wet soil.
activity and root-hole formation (McGarry et al.

2000), and additions of organic matter. Mechanical
options of ripping and cultivating must only be
done after digging pits to ensure the soil (to a depth
below the intended cultivation zone) is drier than
PL. This will ensure brittle failure of the soil rather
than plastic flow (which would give further
structure degradation).
A second example is presented in Proffitt et al.

(1995), where the strong negative impact of sheep
trampling is shown (figure 4.6). Sheep trampling
effectively reduced the aeration in the topsoil to
zero, as evident in figure 4.6a, where there is
massive soil structure degradation (white in the
image) to at least 100 mm. This, in turn, severely
reduced water infiltration and subsequent pasture
growth. Where the sheep were removed after every
rain event, there are many interconnected, faunal
holes to facilitate water infiltration (figure 4.6b).
Before initiating prevention practices, careful

consideration should be given to repairing any
inherent soil structure degradation. The initial
removal of degradation is particularly important if
the degradation is severe or the soil has little,
inherent self-repair ability (it is not a cracking soil)
or if zero till will be practised in the new system.
Under zero till, even a strongly cracking soil will
take several seasons to repair degradation through
biological means. Initial improvement of structure
degradation kick-starts the new prevention system
in which all future traffic is controlled, and the
need for future deep cultivation is removed.
Subsoiling, deep ripping or square ploughing are
potential devices for the initial degradation repair,
but must only be used in soil below PL, where a
problem has been identified (spade holes or
backhoe pit) and its location in the profile noted.
Repair and prevention of structure

degradation
Once structure degradation is located, then repair
and control measures can commence. It is
imperative that soil management and crop
problems are correctly linked to the recorded
presence of structure degradation before repair and
control practices are begun. Location, with spadedug holes or soil pits, needs to be at different
scales: parts of fields, across fields, across farms,
etc. Location in the soil profile is also important to
correctly choose the best repair strategy. If the
problem lies in the top 0.1 m, there is no need to
cultivate to 0.4 m. Deep cultivation is expensive
and has strong potential to produce adverse effects
by inducing deep-soil smearing and compaction,
and bringing subsoil with poor chemical properties
to the soil surface.
Repair, where required, can either be biological or
mechanical, or a combination of both. Biological
methods are preferable, as they not only remove
the possibility of further damaging the soil by
mechanically removing the structure degradation,
but also are more sustainable and have minimum
costs. Current biological options include rotation
crops, pasture phases (with carefully controlled
stocking, especially in wet years), earthworms and
green manures. These activate natural soil
processes of swelling and shrinking, the production
of natural soil pores, and organic matter
improvement. It is recognised that the potential for
these in grazing lands is minimal, but graziers need
to be aware of potential repair strategies that may
be enacted when possible.
70
Different soils as well as different degrees of

structure degradation vary in their response to
repair practices. Generally, cracking clays respond
well to repeated wet and dry cycles under rotation
crops (Pillai & McGarry, 1999), whereas nonswelling soils react better to increases in earthworm
Currently, prevention measures include controlled

traffic, minimum tillage and flotation tyres.
Vegetation clearance may be able to incorporate
flotation tyres (minimising tyre impact in wet soils),
but few other prevention strategies.
In the example described previously, the black clay
at Moura has potential for moderate swell/shrink
with wet/dry cycles under a crop. However, the
immediate problem is the lack of a seedbed, as the
degradation occurs from the immediate soil surface.
Shallow cultivation in dry soil is needed to prepare
a seedbed, then subsequent crops should initiate
cracking of the compacted subsoil. Critical,
however, is that the soil must not be trampled
while moist or wet, or the problem will return.
Fencing is required to better control stock
movement. Thought should be given to the creation
of a sacrifice paddock where stock are kept and
hand-fed in wet times, to save the soil structure on
the remainder of the farm.
Discussion
There are difficulties and challenges to the true
enactment of the above management strategies
across all cropping systems. With vegetation
clearing, in some years it will be difficult to
cultivate and traffic only dry soil. There will also be
strong economic problems associated with moving
animals around to protect wet, fragile soils. Also,
certain soils, especially the hardsetting and crusting
soils, are so fragile that some degree of physical
damage and organic matter decline is inevitable.
The build-up of organic matter is vital to structure
optimisation in such soils, but even under optimal
conditions this can be a most slow process. Other

difficulties arise where several soil types occur in
one field, as one part of the field is sufficiently dry
to traffic or graze without damage, but the other
soil remains too wet. If possible, fencing should be
used to separate such soils. The use of flotation
tyres on tractors should also help reduce damage.
4.2.5 Nutrient cycling

For many years, scientific literature has recognised
that vegetation exerts a considerable influence on
both the nature and amount of organic matter in
soils (Spain et al. 1983). Previous studies have
found that the processes whereby trees improve
soil fertility are numerous and difficult to separate,
although the positive benefits of trees on nutrient
cycling processes are often reported in the
literature (Young 1989; Prinsley 1991; Noble and
Randall 1998).
The role of trees in influencing (generally
increasing) soil nutrient status has been
demonstrated for phosphorus in Eucalyptus populnea
communities (Ebersohn & Lucas 1965), nitrogen
and sulphur (Dowling et al. 1986). More recent
studies have shown that the nutrient availability is
improved beneath eucalypt canopies (Wilson et al.
1990a), giving rise to a heterogeneous soil nutrient
environment. Trees have been described as nutrient
pumps, exploiting and redistributing nutrients from
depth in the soil profile and laterally from areas
beyond the canopy, depositing them via litterfall
and canopy leaching (Noble & Randall 1998). A
consequence of clearing is that this spatial
variability and patchiness is greatly reduced. This
can be attributed to the reduced size of the plant
patches that are using and redistributing the soil
nutrients (grasses versus trees), which can
potentially have a large impact on nutrient losses
(Ludwig et al. 2000).
The relatively deep root systems of trees allow
them to access nutrients deep in the soil, both
limiting leaching potential and making otherwise
unavailable nutrients accessible to shallow-rooted
pasture species. However, plants often compete by
depleting resources required by neighbours, and
trees must acquire water and nutrients that the
pasture understorey would otherwise attain.
Elevated nutrient status under trees generally does
not increase pasture productivity at the community
level (Beale 1973; Walker et al. 1986; Scanlan &
Burrows 1990), although exceptions exist (Christie
1975; Belsky et al. 1989, 1993). Belsky et al. (1989,
1993) found increased herbaceous-layer production
beneath canopies associated with lower soil
temperatures and greater soil fertility. Work in low
fertility, semiarid areas indicates a growth response
in pasture under mature poplar box (E. populnea)
(Ebersohn & Lucas 1965; Christie 1975; Silcock
1980). It is suggested that in these situations
enhanced pasture growth resulted from nutrient
build-up beneath older canopies.
Sheep hoof imprint
Surface faunal pores
Faunal pores
Surface faunal pores
Faunal pores
Figure. 4.6 Binary images of topsoil structure condition in

three sheep grazing treatments: (a) traditional grazing
pasture grazed continuously for 17 weeks, (b) controlled
grazingsheep removed after all rain events, and (c)
ungrazedwhere the pasture was mown only. All samples
were taken at the end of the grazing period. In the images,
black areas are the soil pores (air) and white is the soil
solid. All samples are 100 mm x 100 mm in real life. Source:
Proffitt et al. (1995).
71
In the more fertile cleared brigalow communities,

there is also a reduction in the availability of soil
nutrients as the time since clearing increases
(Graham et al. 1981). This can be related to the
increase in root biomass that tends to immobilise a
large proportion of the available nutrient pool
(especially nitrogen). No measurable decline in the
total nutrient pool size has been recorded in these
circumstances.
Trees also contribute more above-ground litter than
pastures (Frost 1985), and soil fertility has been
demonstrated to improve through increased litter
and soil organic matter return beneath trees
(Christie 1975, Campbell et al. 1988). Litter
decomposition rates can be improved directly by
providing litter of better quality (higher in nutrient
content), and indirectly by altering the habitat for
the soil mesofauna and soil microbes (Chilcott
2000; Young 1997). Retention of a diversity of
vegetation promotes a range of different qualities of
litter through a mixture of woody and herbaceous
litter. This has direct consequences on the soil
biota that mediates litter decomposition processes.
The presence of trees provides a steadily decaying
nutrient store of organic matter (Young 1997).
Trees may also enhance the nutrient status of soil
by providing shade for livestock camping (Chilcott
2000; Belsky 1994; Taylor & Hedges 1984) that
consequentially concentrates nutrients from the
grazed paddock, and may enhance local nutrient
cycling (Georgiadis 1989).
Tree canopies can also act as an effective trap for
atmospheric dust, with the nutrients contained in
the dust being washed from leaves during rain,
and accumulating in the subcanopy soils
(Szott et al. 1991).
Leguminous shrubs (those that fix atmospheric
nitrogen, e.g. some Acacia spp.) have been found to
increase pasture production under canopies by
elevating soil nutrient status (Scrifes et al. 1982).
Some individual tree species are recognised as
providing functional roles in nutrient fixation
through microbial associations. The genus
Casuarina has been documented to fix atmospheric
nitrogen through bacterial nodulation (Torrey
1981). It is likely that most Australian plants,
including acacia, eucalyptus, melaleuca and others,
are mycorrhizal. Most mycorrhizal studies have
pointed to the crucial role of mycorrhizas in
phosphorus uptake but they also appear to improve
the availability of poorly mobile ions of zinc,
copper, molybdenum, and possibly ammonium
(Turnbull 1986).
Effect of tree removal on soil nutrient

status
72
Evidence that trees are important in nutrient

cycling leads to concern about the removal of trees,
nutrient losses and rundown (Ludwig et al. 2000).
Many nutrients are associated with organic matter,
and any decline in soil organic matter will impact

on nutrient availability. Gillman (1976) found
significantly higher carbon and nitrogen levels in
krasnozem soil types under rainforest in north
Queensland than under adjacent eucalypt forest.
Teakle (1950) suggested that after removing the
rainforest from north Queensland krasnozem soil
types, organic carbon content could be halved after
about 20 to 30 years under Paspalum dilatatum
pasture.
Graham (1978) found in studies of solodized
solonetz and sodic soils that in 8 out of 17 paired
sites, a significant decrease in organic carbon
occurred post clearing. The period since clearing in
these instances ranged from 7 to 27 years with a
percentage change from 17 to 41% of original levels.
Isbell (1966) found that brigalow (Acacia harpophylla)
forests had substantially higher organic carbon than
adjacent grasslands in northern central Queensland,
both communities being on very similar grey and
brown clays. Recent observation of strip-cleared
brigalow confirm Isbells observation, with Chilcott
(forthcoming) finding five times higher soil nitrogen
in retained tree strip compared to adjacent treeless
grazed pastures. However, Ahern and Turner (1993)
showed that surface organic carbon and total
nitrogen were similar for vertisols of the Mitchell
grass downs and adjacent open gidgee woodlands
in western Queensland. Dowling et al. (1986)
showed that organic matter was much higher
beneath tree canopies than in associated grassed
interspaces in a brigalowDawson gum
(A. harpophyllaE. cambageana) woodland. However,
in naturally fertile brigalow soils nearby, soil organic
matter did not decline in a five-year period after
clearing and planting to buffel grass (Cenchrus
ciliaris). An adjoining cropped catchment lost 19% of
soil organic matter over the same period. Total
nitrogen followed the same pattern. Data collected
by Lawrence et al. (1993) in these cleared brigalow
catchments showed a short lived flush of plantavailable nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P) and
potassium (K), but that within three years of
clearing, soil organic carbon and total nitrogen
under buffel grass had returned to preclearing levels.
Chilcott (2000) found significantly higher organic
carbon, soil nitrogen and plant available
phosphorus levels beneath trees than in interspaces
in eucalypt woodlands in the Northern Tablelands
of New South Wales. Associated with this was
higher microbial activity and biomass beneath tree
canopies in the woodland. A fertile island was
observed beneath tree canopies as a result of
higher levels of organic inputs. Chilcott (2000)
attributed this to:
1) higher root and litter biomass pools resulting in
an accumulation of organic matter on or near
the soil surface
2) the presence of better quality substrate beneath
trees than in the canopy gaps.
In the mulga lands, the concentration of topsoil

nutrients and organic carbon (from highest to
lowest) is found under mulga, grass, turkeybush,
bare ground, and eroded ground (Miles 1993).
Chilcott (2000) found that clearing Eucalyptus
laeviopinea woodlands resulted in an initial flush
organic C and total N. Following clearing, a readily
available supply of organic carbon for microbial
growth resulted from decomposition of fine roots
and harvest trash. Increases in water availability
and temperature following clearing stimulated
decomposition, contributing to increased soil
organic C initially following clearing. However, soil
organic C and nutrient levels will decline in the
long-term if natural tree regeneration is suppressed,
as readily available nutrients are leached from the
system. Kauffman et al. (1993) investigated effects
of deforestation on tropical dry forests and reported
significant losses of C, N and P from the soil,
estimating that it would require a century or more
to reaccumulate those nutrients and carbon lost.
Phosphorus is a very important element, but it is
not a mobile element within the soil profile. Losses
can be expected where soil erosion is significant. If
leaching and soil erosion losses are excluded, then
the only loss from grazed communities will be in
the form of livestock (meat and wool). The amount
removed will depend on stocking rate and soil
fertility level. Burrows (1993) asserts that the
removal of phosphorus by livestock is not a
significant contributor to phosphorus dynamics in
the medium- to long-term in grazed woodlands.
4.2.6 Soil acidification

In Queensland, more than 2 000 000 ha of
agricultural lands have soils that are naturally acidic
(pH in water <6.5) as a result of leaching processes
in a humid environment, and from previous climatic
conditions (White 1997a; Aitken et al. 1998). Acid
enters the ecosystem naturally as carbonic acid in
rainfall, sulphuric and nitric acids produced by
biological processes, and as organic acids (White
1997a). However, the development of a strongly acid
soil (pH in water <5.5) results in poor plant growth
as a consequence of one or more of the following
problems: aluminium toxicity, manganese toxicity,
deficiencies of calcium, magnesium, phosphorus
and molybdenum, and reduced microbial activity
leading to a reduction in the cycling of nutrients
such as nitrogen. In 1998, 90 000 000 ha of land in

Australia was considered to be acidic, with
approximately 35 000 000 ha highly acidic and
55 000 000 ha moderately or slightly acidic (see
table 4.4). Queensland has the second highest rate
of highly acidic soils, with 8 400 000 ha affected.
Any change in land use may cause accelerated soil
acidification, with the rate of acidification being
dependent on the particular land use and the
susceptibility of the soil. Accelerated acidification is
often associated with intensive agriculture and
horticulture, and in grazing lands where tropical
legumes have been introduced (Commonwealth of
Australia 1996; Aitken et al. 1998; Noble et al.
1997; Noble et al. 1998). Some soil types have
been identified as being vulnerable to acidification.
Accelerated acidification of soils is due to increases
in the losses of products of acid reactions in the
biological carbon and nitrogen cycles (Noble et al.
1997). The main mechanisms of acidification of soils
in the agricultural setting have been identified as:
application of acidifying fertilisers (usually
nitrogen fertilisers) or elemental sulphur in
intensive agriculture
nitrogen fixation by legumes (in oversown
pastures) increasing soil nitrogen which is
subsequently nitrified and leached
removal of plant and waste products higher in
residual alkalinity and redistribution of nutrients
through grazing animals (DEST 1996; Cregan &
Scott 1998).
Effect of clearing on soil acidification

Under native vegetation, acidification is minimal
because nutrients are efficiently recycled from the
soil back through the vegetation, and there is no
removal of plant material off-site. Land clearing is
an acidifying process. Following clearing of trees,
there is a large release of nutrients as windrowed
woody vegetation decomposes (or is burnt).
Leaching of these released nutrients causes soil
acidification. Soil acidification is also caused by
removal of timber off-site, as occurs with logging.
This occurs because the removal of vegetation that
has been produced on-site leaves behind residual
acidity in the soil. Studies in Victoria showed that
50 years after clearing eucalypt forest for timber
and allowing regrowth to occur, the amount of
acidity generated was equivalent to 2.25 t/ha of
lime (Prosser et al. 1993).
Table 4.4 Extent of acid soils in Australia (ha x 106).

Extracted from Cregan and Scott 1998.
State
Highly acidic
(pH Ca<4.8)
Moderate acidity
(pH Ca<4.95.5)
Slight acidity
(pH Ca<5.66.0)
New South Wales
13.5
5.7
5.1
Victoria
3.0
5.6
5.5
Western Australia
4.7
4.7
n/a
South Australia
2.8
n/a
n/a
Queensland
8.4
32.0
n/a
Tasmania
1.0
n/a
n/a
73
Effect of land use on soil acidification

Land uses which are particularly acidifying are
those where (a) there is a large removal of harvested
product (e.g. sugar cane), (b) large amounts of
ammonium-based fertilisers are applied (e.g. many
horticultural crops, dairy pastures), or (c)
introduced legumes are part of the land use (e.g.
stylosanthes pastures). Unfertilised pastures of low
productivity cause minimal acidification. Noble et
al. (1997) examined paired developed
(stylostanthes-dominated pasture) and
undeveloped (grass-dominated pasture) between
Rockhampton, Queensland, and Katherine, Northern
Territory, to estimate the impact of stylostanthes on
rates of soil acidification. In this study the extent of
acidification, whilst significantly more acid in six out
of seven sites, ranged from no measurable change to
severe subsurface acidification extending to over
70 cm and demonstrated considerable variation
among sites. In a comparison of leucaena-based
and nitrogen fertilised and irrigated sites, Noble et
al. (1998) found for both systems a decline in pH
since sampling was taken in 1960. However, the
extent of acidification was much greater under the
more intensively managed fertilised and irrigated
sites than the leucaena system (Noble et al. 1998).
Management of soil acidification

Under extensive production systems where clearing
is to be undertaken to enhance pasture production,
it is important that producers are aware of the
possible long-term consequences. Remediation of
acidification through conventional avenues (i.e.
application of liming sources) is uneconomic in
these systems. Consequently, the producer is left
with assessing the potential risk associated with
clearing. On soils that have a high internal
buffering capacity (i.e. black alkaline cracking
clays), the long-term impact of increased
acidification would be low, since the soil has the
ability to resist any downward pH trends. However,
on light texture sandy soils that have a low internal
buffering capacity, the consequences of accelerated
acidification associated with clearing may be
significant. Therefore, if tree clearing is to be
undertaken for extensive pasture production, areas
of high risk, as outlined previously, should be
avoided or appropriately managed.
In the intensively managed production systems,
landholders can initiate a liming program
appropriate to their production system. Such a
strategy will minimise the risk of soil acidification
becoming a production constraint, and will protect
the long-term productivity of the soil resource.
74
Soil acidification is detected by a gradual decline in

soil pH. This decline will be more evident in lighttextured soils than in clayey soils, because the
former have a low ability to buffer or counteract
the effects of acidity on soil pH. Landholders should
monitor soil pH by annual sampling to ensure that
their liming program is counteracting the

acidification caused by their production system. In
particular, light-textured soils should be targeted for
regular pH monitoring. It is likely that soil
acidification rates will be greater in areas receiving
more than 500 mm annual rainfall because of the
enhanced possibility of leaching in this environment.
Planting perennial, rather than annual, grass and
legume species will reduce accelerated soil
acidification by maintaining an established root
system throughout the year for nutrient and water
uptake, thereby reducing nutrient loss by leaching.
Reforestation of cleared areas will arrest further soil
acidification by re-establishing closed nutrient
cycling, and reducing nutrient leaching by
increasing evapotranspiration.
In summary, the following management strategies
will minimise accelerated soil acidification:
regular monitoring of soil pH, particularly that of
light-textured soils
implementing a regular liming program
avoid clearing light-textured soils
use of perennial pasture species
reafforestation of cleared areas.
4.2.7 Hydrology
The removal of deep-rooted woody vegetation and
its replacement by shallow rooted grass species,
leads to alteration of hydrological relationships
within catchments. Generally, the removal of trees
increases the deep drainage component of the soil
water balance, while heavily grazed pasture
systems can result in large increases in surface
run-off from cleared land systems (Miles, 1993;
Silburn, et al. 1992). If cleared land is then brought
into cultivation, further increases in drainage below
the root zone and surface run-off can be expected
(Wockner & Freebairn 1991). Often, changes in
water-balance components are a result of changes
in water-use patterns as well as depth of water
extraction by plants. The mobilisation of salt
previously distributed in deeper subsoil and
substrate layers that accompanies alteration of the
hydrology and the associated salinity problems is
discussed in section 4.2.8. Specific studies of other
changes relevant to Queensland follow.
It should be noted that for most parts of
Queensland (other than coastal and subcoastal
areas and high rainfall areas of Cape York),
potential evaporation exceeds precipitation by a
factor of 2 in any month. As a result, groundwater
recharge is a small and irregular component of
water balance. This is in strong contrast with the
situation in southern and south-western Australia,
where recharge is a regular feature of the water
balance, due to rainfall commonly exceeding
evapotranspiration potential in winter months, and
resultant salinity problems are widespread.
However, in Queensland, sporadic heavy rainfall
events are important in overall recharge rates.
Differences in water use can be demonstrated

between native grasses, introduced shrubby
legumes and Eucalyptus spp. in a north Queensland
red earth (Gardener et al. 1990). Trees extracted
water to a depth of at least 4 m, whereas grasses
mainly used water from less than 1 m of the soil. A
detailed examination of water use in a planted
flooded gum (Eucalyptus grandis) agroforestry
experiment showed that, at higher tree densities, a
greater proportion of soil water was extracted from
deep within the soil profile (Eastham & Rose 1988,
1990; Eastham et al. 1988, 1990a, 1990b).
Impact of clearing trees

There is substantial evidence that removal of trees
disturbs the hydrological regime, often resulting in
expression of salinity (see section 4.2.8). A oneyear study by Williams et al. (1993) in north
Queensland showed increased deep drainage once
trees were clearedfrom 9 to 86 mm for a red
earth, from 118 to 238 mm for a sandy red earth,
and from 72 to 115 mm for a yellow podzolic.
When these results were extrapolated for 100 years
using the PERFECT (Littleboy et al. 1989) and
SWIM (Ross 1990) models, increased deep drainage
following clearing was from 15 to 74 mm/year for a
red earth and from 1 to 8 mm/year for a neutral
red duplex soil. This change in groundwater
recharge, in conjunction with soil salt levels of
0.4 mS/cm and groundwater salinity levels of
1500 to 5000 mS/L, present a potential salinity
hazard after clearing.
There are, however, some studies in Queensland
that have presented different results. Lawrence and
Sinclair (1989) reported that the clearing of
brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) in central Queensland
and planting a crop or pasture did not alter the
annual catchment water balance. The mean
recharge rate measured by Lawrence et al. (1993)
rose from 7 mm to 28 mm per year after
establishing a buffel grass pasture, but this was due
to one very wet period (AprilMay 1983). Apart
from this period, groundwater recharge had been
the same under buffel grass and brigalow. Clearing
Eucalyptus laevopinea woodlands (northern New
South Wales) caused a significant increase in soil
moisture profiles, with soils remaining saturated or
near-saturated for 12 months following clearing
(Reid et al. 1998). This (coupled with the clearing
disturbance) resulted in a substantial shift in
pasture species composition from previously
palatable grasses to unpalatable sedges and rushes
(Chilcott 2000). Pressland (1976a) demonstrated
that cleared mulga areas had up to 77 mm less
evapotranspiration compared with an area thinned
to 640 trees/ha.
An important consideration in hydrology is that
woody plants re-establish or regrow in areas that
are cleared, particularly when pulling, chaining or
stem injection is the method of clearing. This is
reported for eucalypt (Walker et al. 1972; Anderson
et al. 1983; Burrows et al. 1988a), brigalow

(Anderson et al. 1984), gidgee (Reynolds & Carter
1993) and tea-tree (melaleuca) communities
(Anderson et al. 1983). The regrowth may support
the same leaf area as uncleared woodlands, and
therefore the hydrological regime may not differ
greatly between intact woodlands and cleared
areas with woody regrowth. A factor of major
importance will be the depth of rooting of mature
trees versus regrowth. Unfortunately, no studies
have compared these aspects.
The return of woody vegetation (approximately
10% of total paddock area) into previously cleared
grazing lands resulted in more thorough and rapid
drying of soil profiles beneath five- to six-year-old
trees. Reid et al. (1998) concluded that
appropriately located woody vegetation has a role
in mitigating waterlogging and dryland salinisation
in upland temperate pastures.
Catchment level effects of water-use patterns have
been difficult to detect in some short-term studies
due to between-catchment variability and betweenyear variation in rainfall in southern Queensland
ironbarkblack speargrass woodland (Prebble &
Stirk 1988). Changes in water balance components
have been clearly shown in studies at the 1 ha
scale on cultivated cracking clays (Freebairn et al.
1986; Wockner & Freebairn 1991). Maintenance of
high levels of stubble or crop cover reduced run-off
volumes by 40% and peak discharge rates by
7085% compared to bare soil. These changes at
the small scale are not easily demonstrated at the
large scale (e.g. 1 000 000 ha) even when a large
proportion of a catchment is modified.
With the application of water-balance models and
appropriate physical measurements, we now have
the capacity to estimate changes in water-balance
components of different land uses and management
options. These models allow us to explore long-term
scenarios and alternative management options at
the point or paddock scale (PERFECTLittleboy et
al. 1992; APSIMMcCown et al. 1996). These tools
need to be linked to landform, land use, geology and
groundwater maps to determine risk profiles.
4.2.8 Salinity
With dryland salinity reportedly affecting nearly
2 500 000 ha Australia wide in 1996, and potential
for this figure to grow to over 12 000 000 ha,
salinity has become a major natural resource
management issue (Hayes 1997). Impacts of
dryland salinity include retarded plant growth,
degraded soil structure, limitations on water use by
plants, subsequent loss of productivity,
infrastructure damage, loss of biodiversity, impacts
on water quality, and disruption of ecological
processes in wetlands and riverine ecosystems
(SalCon 1997; MDBC 1999). Estimates of the
known impacts (largely infrastructure damage) put
the annual cost at $270 million, including
75
$130 million in lost agricultural production

(LWRRDC 1997; PMSEIC 1999).
The incidence of salinity-affected areas in
Queensland is smaller and more scattered, with
10 000 ha5 of land estimated to be affected by
dryland salinity (Gordon 1991). However, salinity is
considered an emerging issue, with potential for
significant areas of Queenslands agricultural lands
to be affected over the next 1030 years (Gordon
1998).
Approximately 5.3% of Australian soils naturally
contain soluble salts (Northcote & Skene 1972).
The presence of these salts is commonly attributed
to deposits of oceanic salts by rainfall or wind, but
may also result from chemical weathering of rock
minerals and marine sediments (SalCon 1997). It is
generally accepted that the main cause of dryland
salinity is inappropriate clearing of deep-rooted
perennial vegetation and its replacement with
shallow-rooted crops or pastures or with urban
development (RIRDC 2000). The resulting alteration
of the hydrologic regime increases recharge and
mobilises salt previously distributed in deeper
subsoil and substrate layers. These then
accumulate in vulnerable parts of the landscape
(Loveday & Bridge 1983; SalCon 1997) accelerating
the salinity process (House et al. 1998). Because
the hydrological processes that affect ground water
movements are complex, it may take many years
before any evidence of salinity becomes apparent
(Oliver et al. 1996).
Although the proportional distribution of naturally
occurring saline and sodic soils in Queensland is
similar to other States (Shaw et al. 1994; SalCon
1997), current rainfall patterns, geology, soil types,
and extent and duration of land clearance result in
lower rates of saline-affected areas in Queensland
(House et al. 1998). With the majority of
Queenslands rain falling in summer, evaporation
mostly exceeds rainfall, so the soil profile is rarely
fully saturated and recharge only occurs where a
succession of wet periods prevent the soil from
drying out (Hobson & Carey 1994).
With high rates of tree clearing in Queensland
continuing for land development, there is an
opportunity to implement preventative management
strategies to prevent expansion of salinity and
sodicity problems observed in other States (Gordon
1998). For example, there is some scope under the
recently enacted Vegetation Management Act 1999
(Qld), for statutory controls on tree clearing to
strategically avoid the expression of salinity in the
landscape. The Act provides for the development of
Regional Vegetation Management Plans, which
potentially may anticipate the long-term
consequences of tree clearing on groundwater
hydrology, and plan tree-clearing restrictions in
vulnerable catchment areas.
76
There is a considerable body of literature that

addresses management of saline-affected areas,
and some of the issues involved in this are

discussed here. Considerable development in the
detection of salinity risk has emerged recently.
These tools are essential in Queensland in order to
plan for development and anticipate future salinity
risks, and will also be reviewed here.
Identification of salinity risk potential

Improvement of the predictive capability of salinity
hazard assessment to avoid inappropriate tree
clearing or development requires a thorough
understanding of the processes contributing to
salinity and sodicity problems. SalCon (1997)
identified the following factors that can provide
information on current and potential salinity levels
and processes:
landform features and geology in the catchment
vegetation species and communities, and specific
responses to salinity or ion toxicity
local climate and rainfall patterns
soil properties, salinity and sodicity levels
water characteristics, salinity and sodicity levels
land use records.
(For a comprehensive discussion of these
attributes refer to the Salinity Management
Handbook, SalCon 1997.)
Methods to determine the risk or potential for
salinity problems usually involves a combination of
measuring and modelling a combination of these
characteristics to produce an informed prediction of
the likely consequences of different management
scenarios. However, a major impediment to the
broader identification of salinity risk is the
limitation of existing spatial datasets. In areas
where dryland salinity is an expression of localised
hydro-geomorphic features (such as the Eastern
Downs), datasets in the order of 1:100 000 scale or
better are required to fully delineate high-risk
subcatchments.
Soil properties
Investigations of soil properties can be used to
determine hydrologic processes, history of
waterlogging and salting, and guidelines for the
potential of the soil under cropping, pasture or
trees (SalCon 1997). Properties such as soil pH,
concretions, clay content, mineralogy and soil
salinity can all indicate something about salts in
soils. Examination of the soil salinity profile can be
interpreted to determine whether recharge or
discharge may be occurring at a specific location
(SalCon 1997). Modelling software has been
developed to use a number of parameters of the soil
profile incorporated in SALF software. It predicts the
soil leaching fraction6 and salinity within the root
zone under different irrigation regimes, to then
predict the effect of growing different crops (SalCon
1997). Utilising these techniques, Gordon and
Claridge (1997), in a recent investigation of the
Upper Dawson River catchment, combined soil
characteristics, SALF soil profile modelling software
and electrical conductance of the top 6.0 m of soil

to demonstrate the potential of a large proportion of
the area studied for use in irrigated cropping. This
use, however, was conditional on following certain
criteria for selection of crops, and volume and
method of irrigation. The risk of developing a
salinity hazard for areas where a highly permeable
soil exists above a less permeable soil (in this study
a light Sodosol above a heavier Vertosol were
highlighted).
salting is mainly restricted to areas with between

600 and 1500 mm per annum rainfall, and hence
restricted largely to the eastern and northern
portion of the State (figure 4.7). Further, use of
moving average rainfall pattern allows comparison
of historic rainfall patterns to determine whether a
current expression of salinity may potentially
increase or decrease depending on predicted
rainfall trend (SalCon 1997).
Landform
Climate and rainfall
Information about landform and geology can provide

useful information about sources of salt, areas likely
to be susceptible to salinity expression, and
geological structures controlling water movement.
Certainly an important factor in predicting salinity

hazard potential in Queensland is average annual
rainfall characteristics. In Queensland, watertable
salinity hazard
high
7001100 mm/yr
moderate 600700 and 11001500 mm/yr

low
<600 and >1500 mm/yr
Cairns
Townsville
Mount Isa
Mackay
Emerald
Rockhampton
Charleville
Brisbane
Figure 4.7 Zones of salinity hazard in Queensland, based on annual rainfall and evaporation patterns. Source: SalCon 1997.
77
Vegetation
Observation of plant communities, as well as
specific physiological responses in individual
plants, can indicate areas of current or recurrent
salinity, and demonstrate the need for more
comprehensive salinity investigation.
At a broader scale, vegetation patterns,
demonstrating variations in density, species
composition, and changes over time, using remote
sensing images, can provide more detailed
information about salinity risk and expression.
Remote sensing methods can collate information on
a number of the features reviewed previously in this
section (i.e. landform, soils, vegetation, and land
use) to estimate and map the mass and extent of
salt in the landscape. These methods of mapping
can be used to identify areas of potential salinity
hazard and salt loads likely to be mobilised under a
wetter equilibrium.
Salinity mapping can also be carried out using
ground-based geophysical methods. Most
commonly, electromagnetic induction (EMI) is used
for site surveys and regional reconnaissance
(SalCon 1997). By inducing a magnetic field within
the soil, the electrical conductance of the soil (EC)
can be measured at various depths. These
measurements are indicative values, as the readings
are of the bulk soil at given water content, and the
instrumentation is sensitive to clay content and
mineralogy, soil water content, and the depth of
bands of more conductive material within the soil
profile (SalCon 1997). There is considerable
information available in the literature that
quantifies the likely significance of EMI readings
with respect to different profile effects, and other
factors. SalCon (1997) recommends the use of
ground truthing by the taking of soil samples to
verify EM readings.
Salinity hazard investigations in

Queensland
An investigation of salinity hazard following tree
clearing in north Queensland (Williams et al. 1997)
using a simulation model, demonstrated a
substantial increase in deep drainage following the
replacement of woodland with native grassland
across a number of different soil profiles. Whilst
introduction of a perennial legume lessens the
increase in deep drainage, the effectiveness of this
vegetation is strongly dependent on nutrient status
and, subsequently, tree clearing may well release
water, but this may not be converted into dry
matter and water use if nutrient and other edaphic
limiting factors remain. Williams et al. (1997)
highlighted the need to develop routine tools for
assessing the risk of salinity hazard at sites where
tree clearing is planned, to predict ground water
response and hill-slope watertable developments
that can mobilise salt in the landscape.
78
A number of recent Queensland studies have begun

using GIS to assist the process of developing
salinity hazard prediction (Bui 1997; Williams et al.
1997; Searle & Baillie 1998; Bourke et al. 1999) The
Queensland Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) adopted the HARSD (Hydrogeomorphic
analysis of regional spatial data) methodology to
quantify groundwater-level trends in the
MurrayDarling Basin (Bourke et al. 1999). These
trends have been used to predict the area of
groundwater discharge over the next 100 years
(Bourke et al. 1999).
By classifying the landscape into discrete,
hydrogeomorphic units of similar aquifer properties
and recharge/discharge behaviour, a linear
regressional relationship was developed to create a
baseline water elevation surface for each discrete
unit. From this, a groundwater level map for the
Queensland MurrayDarling basin was developed
in a GIS environment. The predicted water
elevation surfaces for 2020, 2050 and 2100 were
generated to determine salt loads, and estimates of
land area with high watertable, areas with salt load
mobilised to the surface, and river salinity for each
of the future years (Bourke et al. 1999).
Further pilot work by the Department of Natural
Resources has explored the use of a linear additive
method within a GIS framework to automatically
identify subcatchments at potential risk of salinity
(Searle & Baille 1998). GIS layers used in the
analysis included soils, geology, climate, vegetation
and topographic indices. Each data layer was rated
with a separate salinity hazard rating, based on a
defined set of decision rules. When overlaid, the
total of assigned ratings were used to map areas
along a continuum from low to high salinity
hazard. The results of the modelling were reflected
in the experience of field staff, and Searle and Baille
suggest this modelling represents a fairly accurate
means of assessing salinity hazard at the landscape
level. They suggest that further development of this
model would necessarily include a more rigorous
method of ground truthing, testing the sensitivity of
the model to different weightings of the layers, and
improving the way in which conceptual landscape
salinity processes are represented in digital models.
Bui (1997) has similarly developed a GIS-based
salinity risk assessment model for north
Queensland. The risk of salinity hazard after tree
clearing was assessed based on information about
climate, vegetation cover, position in the landscape,
depth to groundwater, rate of recharge and
presence of salt in the groundwater. As a result of
this study, it was recommended for the study area
that recharge areas should not be cleared in
watersheds where unconfined aquifers are present
and where soils with per cent TSS>0.25 occur,
although where intermediate recharge areas are
cleared, the introduction of deep-rooted improved
pasture species may control recharge (Bui 1997).
Bui identified the need for more detailed
hydrogeological information to give more certainty

to the results.
It should be noted that most approaches to
mapping salinity are static tools and do not allow
an assessment of catchment water balance. Whilst
high risk catchments can be identified, the
number of trees that need to be retained cannot.
Catchment characterisation and catchment water
balance (using flow tube modelling) is being tested
within the National Land and Water Audit to
provide a quantitative framework for salinity
management (Coram et al. 2000). Unfortunately,
this work is focused on remedial action in southern
and western Australia.
Management
The management of shallow saline watertables to
reverse the process of secondary salinity is
problematic because of a number of factors. These
include:
the complex interaction between land use and
management, landscape hydrology,
geomorphology, historic salt loads, and
socioeconomic and environmental factors
the slow hydrological response, that is,
secondary salinity often becomes worse before it
gets better even where remediation is
implemented
the cost to manage may be greater than the
economic benefit
and the site of the cause of salinity (recharge
areas) are often separated from the site of
expression.
Direct management of saline-affected areas can be
carried out in a number of ways. Strategies include
altering hydrological processes, improvement of
water efficiency where irrigating, and direct
management of saline-affected land (SalCon 1997;
Thorburn 1999). Direct management of salineaffected land may include establishing salt-tolerant
plant species with production benefits. A
comprehensive review of management strategies
and their application is available in the Salinity
Management Handbook (SalCon 1997).
Altering hydrological processes

Strategies to alter hydrological processes can
operate to reduce salinity by:
reducing recharge
intercepting water in transmission area
increasing water use in discharge areas.
This may be achieved in a number of ways,
including revegetating catchment areas to lower the
watertable and implementing engineering options
(drainage). Engineering solutions such as deep
drainage or pumping of saline-affected lands can
involve the difficulty of disposing of saline water.
Traditional engineering solutions (pumps and
drains) are generally viewed as uneconomical, and
are becoming less popular as the downstream
impact on other water users and the environment

are becoming more apparent. (Clarke et al. 1998;
Thorburn 1999). Alternatively, manipulation of the
hydrologic cycle by revegetation strategies has
become increasingly popular. Revegetation can act
to reduce recharge or maximise discharge (RIRDC
2000). Reduction of groundwater recharge is
achieved by interception of rainfall by vegetation.
Transpiration by the plants causes a waterpotential gradient throughout the plant, drawing
water from the soil. Selection of species with
appropriate leaf area and canopy structure are
important considerations for planting to reduce
recharge (RIRDC 2000). However, Scholfield (1990)
argues that the effectiveness of trees in capturing
water in the unsaturated soil zone depends on
whether recharge occurs largely from the slower
matrix flow of soil water that trees can effectively
capture or the faster preferential flow, which
recharges groundwater before trees are able to
transpire. There is some evidence to suggest native
vegetation is able to transpire significantly more
rainfall than crops or pasture (McFarlane et al.
1995) because trees are able to use water from
deeper in the soil profile although again, leaf area,
canopy structure and physiological features are
important (Morris & Thompson 1983).
Revegetation or regeneration to enhance
groundwater discharge has been widely promoted
since several studies demonstrated the reversal of
rising groundwater levels under these strategies
(e.g. Bari & Scholfield 1992). It should be noted,
however, that as much as 7080% of a catchment
may need to be revegetated to significantly reduce
the level of the watertable and salinity (Bari &
Scholfield 1992; George et al. 1999). A potential
limitation of the use of vegetation in saline areas is
the accumulation of salts in the root zone over
time, limiting transpiration and growth of these
plants (Thorburn 1996; Thorburn 1999). As plants
take up water from or near a watertable, the
groundwater flowing towards the roots carries
salts, which accumulate in this way. Evaluation of
the effectiveness of such strategies has been
undertaken by:
direct measurement of uptake
indirect measurement
predictive modelling.
Careful planning and knowledge of the catchment
hydrology, geology and so forth, is essential to
avoid these problems. House et al. (1998)
recommend planting concentrated on transmission
and recharge areas of the catchment. It should be
noted that a great deal of work has focused on
revegetation strategies and their effectiveness,
particularly in the southern States of Australia. For
the Queensland situation, it may be possible to
derive some guidelines as to the appropriate
retention rates from this body of work (Ian Gordon
February 2000, pers. comm., 6 March).
79
Direct management of saline areas

In southern Australia, it is acknowledged that in
many catchments that are affected by salinity, total
remediation will not occur, and opportunities for
the productive use of saline land and water need to
be considered. Considerable efforts have been
directed toward improving the productive capability
of saline lands, with vegetation such as grasses and
shrubs for grazing, and the use of trees and shrubs
for other wood and non-wood products (Barson &
Barrett-Lennard 1995; Marcar et al. 1995; House et
al. 1998). Considerable effort has also been devoted
to determining suitable species to plant in saline
areas, particularly those that offer a production
benefit. The Queensland Forestry Research
Institute, in field trials, has tested the performance
of individual tree species for a range of salinity
classes and, subsequently, provided a guide to the
suitability, planting and management of these
species (House et al. 1998). Successful trials of a
number of native and exotic salt-tolerant forage
plants for summer rainfall areas are summarised in
Fisher and Skerman (1986).
Various combinations of pasture and trees,
particularly fodder trees, have been trialled to test
production and salinity management. Clarke et al.
(1998), in modelling revegetation strategies for the
Western Australian wheat belt, demonstrated that
replacing annual pasture with deep-rooted
perennial pasture, or pristine native vegetation,
prevented the onset of salinity. However, by
combining remnant native vegetation, 60 m spaced
tree belts and deep-rooted perennial pasture
(mostly in upper mid-slope bays), the expression of
salinity was reduced to 10% of the cleared area (as
opposed to 40% under the current land use)
(Clarke et al. 1998). Alternative industries,
including salt harvesting, aquaculture and solar
ponds, are currently being investigated.
Most authors agree that, at the property level, a
whole-farm approach to salinity management is
essential, with consideration of economic and
production issues, which are also consistent with
catchment hydrological behaviour (SalCon 1997;
White 1999). By the nature of the hydrological
impact of activities that accelerate salinity, the
problems crossover property boundaries.
Consequently, management options are often
more successful where the expression of salinity
is localised and only one or a small number of
properties form the at risk catchment. Approaches
to dealing with salinity problems and potential
hazards must necessarily consider broader scale
planning.
80
4.3 Management and production

aspects
4.3.1 Crop production
Apart from naturally treeless areas (parts of Darling
Downs and central Queensland bluegrass), all
cropping in Queensland is conducted on cleared
lands. These range from highly fertile alluvial soils
which may have been well-grassed, to rainforest
areas to brigalow lands and poplar box woodlands
that supported a high woody biomass before
clearing (see Weston et al. 1981 for assessment of
potential cropping in Queensland). Cropping has
been used as a means to control regrowth of trees
and shrubs following clearing (Johnson 1964). This
was particularly used in the early phases of the
brigalow development (DPI 1976). Only a few
woody species can survive in a cropping situation,
for example Alstonia constricta, Eremocitrus glauca
and Atalaya hemiglauca, because of their deep root
system and their ability to shoot from severed roots
(Anderson 1984).
There is often a long-term decline in productivity as
the time since initial clearing and development
increases (Graham et al. 1981). Long-term
monoculture of grains leads to decline in yields and
grain protein content, with the rate of decline
depending on soil type (Dalal & Mayer 1996). This
occurs on naturally open clay soils as well as
cleared loam and clay soils. In part, this is due to the
high nutrient conditions that prevail in the first few
years after initial development. However, continual
cropping will reduce soil organic matter, particularly
in light textured soils (Graham et al. 1981, Dalal &
Mayer 1996) and result in lower crop yields without
the input of fertilisers or ley pasture rotation.
High-value horticultural crops may require some
form of protection from wind, but this is usually
provided by planted windbreaks, rather than
natural vegetation. The use of shelter strips in
cropping systems is uncommon in Queensland, and
observations indicate that native vegetation on the
margins of cropped areas generally decreases crop
height, and presumably yield, around the perimeter
of the cropped areas. This has resulted in many
cropping paddocks having any buffer strips of trees
removed. While this may have reduced the
competition with the crops, it may also have
resulted in loss of the benefits of having retained
trees (e.g. windbreaks).
Windbreaks can be particularly important in highvalue crops, where the physical damage due to
wind can be a source of serious production losses
(Snell & Brooks 1999). Windbreaks may also help
control spray drift, which is becoming an
increasing concern where insecticides are used on
cotton farms adjoining beef production areas. In
north Queensland the growth, morphology and
yield of maize, potatoes and peanuts were
measured over a four-year period at increasing
distance from windbreaks (Snell & Brooks 1999).

The results suggest that windbreaks increased yield
of field crops such as potatoes and peanuts.
Increased potato yield was attributed to reduced
wind damage to leaves, while a combination of
lower water stress and leaf damage (during the
initial stages of crop growth) increased peanut
yield. Expected yield increases in high-value crops
(such as potatoes and peanuts) can offset the loss
of productive land on which the windbreak is
growing, and yield reductions due to treecrop
competition. Snell and Brooks (1999) suggest the
evidence pointing to reduced leaf damage by wind
can be extended to orchard crops (such as
mangoes, avocados, lychees and macadamias),
where fruit quality may be improved by reducing
wind damage in orchards.
In southern Australia, shelter belts, while reducing
crop yields adjacent to the tree line, can lead to
increases in production to a distance of up to 25
tree heights, due to moisture savings, higher CO2,
higher soil temperature and less wind damage (Bird
1984). In the temperate climates of the southern
States, pasture and crop yields were increased by
up to 30% in a downwind zone extending to about
ten times windbreak height (Breckwoldt 1986;
Bird 1984).
Recent simulations of crop performance behind
windbreaks by Meinke et al. (in press) used
micrometeorological data collected at Hermitage
(Queensland) and Esperance (Western Australia) to
predict yield improvements in wheat. They
predicted an average yield increase of between 3%
and 13% for maximum shelter conditions. The
authors conceded the real impact of natural shelter
will be considerably less given the impossibility of
providing maximum shelter to a field crop over a
large distance, and that most winds blow obliquely
to the shelter. Further simulations by Carberry et
al. (in press) at 17 sites across Australia predicted
an average 10% yield advantage for protection from
winds in any direction, with the largest yield
advantage in Australia expected at Dalby. The
overall conclusion of the simulation experiments
was that for cropping microclimate impacts alone
cannot justify the planting or maintenance of tree
windbreaks on farms. Such justification needs to be
the result of a combination of benefits in addition
to an expected crop yield increase, for example the
production of saleable wood, protection from
damaging winds, assistance in lowering
watertables, increasing the biodiversity or simply
valuing the trees for their aesthetic appeal
(Prinsley 1998).
and problems arising from reducing woody plant

competition with pasture in savanna grazing lands,
Burrows (1993), cites the following reasons for
clearing trees:
improved livestock handling
improved groundwater supplies
better dietary choice for animals
improved habitat for some (authors emphasis)
wildlife
enhanced augmentation of pastures with
legumes
the planting of useful fodder trees.
Burrows (1993) also lists the disadvantages of
removing trees and shrubs as:
loss of browse and drought reserves
increased salinisation in susceptible areas
increased erosion hazard in susceptible areas
promotion and growth of undesirable woody
weeds and regrowth
reduced shade and shelter for domestic stock
a more extreme microclimate
fragmentation of wildlife habitat
less sequestration of carbon in long-lasting
organisms
loss of useful timber.
Burrows (1993) notes the justification of tree
clearing must be economic and must allow for
greater production than would be achieved by
alternative land-use practices.
Substantial production benefits to graziers have
been demonstrated over most of Queensland with
management of plant populations, especially in
southern and central parts of the State (Burrows
1990). There can be financial benefits to individual
landholders, especially in the short-term, arising
from applying woodland management and control
of shrub species (Harrington et al. 1984b; Rolfe
1999; Gillard et al. 1989). This has resulted in this
production practice being almost universally
implemented throughout the grazing lands as
evidenced by the high degree of clearing, especially
in coastal and subcoastal Queensland (DNR 1999b).
4.3.2 Animal production
In systems grazed by domestic livestock, animal

production is strongly related to the availability of
young plant material (e.g. Ash et al. 1982,
McLennan 1988) and controlled by environmental
and plant characteristics. Grazing history, burning
and tree management have a major impact on both
the quantity and quality of pasture production, and
hence on diet quality (Ash et al. 1995). Even in
those cases where management practices like tree
clearing produces more pasture of the same total
quality, animal production may increase due to the
enhanced ability of the domestic animals to select a
diet higher in leaf and/or green material.
Tree clearing is listed as one of the main reasons

for increased livestock production in Queensland
(Gramshaw & Lloyd 1993). ORourke et al. (1992)
provide a detailed analysis of beef production
systems in Queensland. In a review of the benefits
The whole basis of setting safe stocking rates in

Queensland is based on the principle of safe
utilisation (Wilson et al. 1984; McKeon et al. 1990;
Scanlan et al. 1994; Johnston et al. 1996). Under
this approach, the animal requirements on either
81
an annual or seasonal basis are compared with the

growth over the same period. A number of studies
have shown that annual utilisation rates of 20%
(i.e. 20% of annual growth is actually consumed by
domestic livestock) of native pastures would result
in satisfactory production per head (compared with
the maximum possible from that pasture system in
that environment) and would ensure that pastures
were maintained in good condition. This system
forms the basis of restructuring in the South West
Strategy and has been shown to be appropriate for
the South Burnett and Upper Burdekin areas (Hall
et al. 1998).
Fodder
Retention of native vegetation for the provision of
fodder from trees and shrubs is often quoted as an
example of good management practice. Top fed
species are an important component of grazing
systems in western Queensland (Turner &
McDonald 1993). In Queensland, this applies
primarily to the mulga country (Acacia aneura) as
mulga leaf is an important dietary component
under all conditions, and is extensively used for
drought feeding. However, this has a downside in
that it enables stock to be retained in paddocks
long after the herbaceous species have been
severely grazed. During drought, when herbage and
grasses are absent, many other species such as
Acacia stenophylla (belalie) and Acacia shirleyi
(lancewood), which otherwise are seldom eaten,
become major components of the diet (Turner &
McDonald 1993). During the initial growth phase
following rain, the presence of high stock numbers
can result in severe damage to regrowing pasture
(Harrington et al. 1984a). Thus if livestock are
maintained on pasture during drought by using tree
fodder species, overgrazing of grasses occurs
following the first rains and long-term pasture
deterioration can occur.
The importance of forage supply on domestic stock
production was emphasised by Harrington et al.
(1984a), who said that the two most important
factors in maintaining animal production in
semiarid woodlands of Queensland and New South
Wales were maximising forage potential and
controlling the biomass of shrubs (for a discussion
on the impact of grazing on vegetation see section
4.1.4). Animal production was lower in areas with
a dense woody layer because of increased
predation losses due to harboured predators,
especially feral pigs, and increased losses from
flystrike because of the difficulty of carrying out
complete musters under these conditions.
Benefits from tree retention
82
Livestock and crop production can be increased by

using remnant vegetation for shade and shelter in
some environments. In northern New South Wales,
wool production increased by up to 31% and sheep
were on average 6 kilograms per head heavier,
when protected by an efficient wind break. Survival

rates of lambs and sheep were also higher during
extreme conditions (Breckwoldt 1986; Bird et al.
1984). The large increases in sheep production
were due to reduced stress and less energy
expenditure (Lynch & Donnelly 1980; Bird 1998).
Despite the introduction of heat tolerant cattle, most
landholders see tree retention as desirable at least
for stock shade and shelter. Shade may enable cattle
to graze longer during the day and may extend
pasture usage to areas well away from watering
points. At least half the calf losses in north-western
Queensland can be attributed to heat stress,
particularly in the first week of life and in calves
born away from shade. Heat stress also reduces
fertility (Daly 1984). Dupont (1998) recorded an
average reduction in temperature of 12C with a
projected foliage cover ranging from 25% to 60% in
19 sites from Warwick to Quilpie. An increase in
minimum temperatures was also observed. In areas
prone to frosting, tree retention results in
temperatures 24C warmer than if vegetation had
been cleared (McIvor 1990a). Chilcott (forthcoming)
observed a 4.5C decrease in summer maximum
temperatures beneath brigalow in central
Queensland compared with temperatures in an
open paddock during summer (DecemberMarch)
1998. The difference was greater for days where the
temperature in the open was greater than 35C,
being 7.2C cooler on average. Lack of shade
causes increased lamb mortality in the naturally
treeless Mitchell grass land in north-western
Queensland. It has been reported that the provision
of shade during the last weeks of pregnancy and
during the lambing period increases lamb marking
by 20% (Roberts 1984). Shade is required from an
animal welfare perspective as well as from animal
performance (e.g. Daly 1984).
In a study in the New England tablelands in New
South Wales, Reid et al. (in press) compared open
fertilised paddocks, to treed, fertilised paddocks
and showed that there were significant gains in
sheep production with the presence of trees. Treed
paddocks had 34% more sheep, which grazed
more (and were heavier) and thus the paddock
sustained a grazing rate 42% higher. As a
consequence, the paddocks cut 32% more wool,
the wool was of a higher quality and the paddock
returned 55% more income. Shelter from strong,
cold winds is a consideration in parts of southern
Queensland especially for newly shorn sheep.
Beekeepers are an active group in rural Queensland
who have pointed out the necessity to retain trees
for their industry. Some well recognised honeyproducing timbers, for example yellow box
(Eucalyptus melliodora) have largely been cleared in
south-east Queensland (Blake & Roff 1988), while
others previously considered are under threat of
clearing, for example yapunyah (Eucalyptus
ochrophloia) in south-west Queensland.
4.3.3 Pasture production
Non-leguminous trees and shrubs normally

decrease pasture production within their projected
tree canopies and beyond (House & Hall 1999).
Documentation of higher pasture production in
open areas compared with woodlands of
Queensland include Eucalyptus crebra in north
Queensland (Gillard 1979; Gardener et al. 1990;
McIvor & Gardener 1995); Eucalyptus spp. in central
Queensland (Walker et al. 1986; Scanlan & Burrows
1990); Acacia harpophylla in central Queensland
(Scanlan 1991); Eucalyptus populnea (Walker et al.
1972) Callitris columellaris (Wells 1974) in southern
Queensland; and Acacia aneura (Beale 1973) in
south-western Queensland. Shrub species that have
also been reported as decreasing pasture production
include Acacia nilotica in north-west Queensland
(Burrows et al. 1990); Eremophila mitchellii in Central
Queensland (Scanlan 1991); and Eremophila gilesii in
south-western Queensland (Burrows et al. 1990).
Dodonaea viscosa and Cassia nemophila in northwestern New South Wales also show similar trends
to shrubs in Queensland (Noble 1997b).
Detailed field experiments in the Charleville (Beale
1973), Dirranbandi (Walker et al. 1972),
Mundubbera (Tothill 1983), Gympie (Walker et al.
1986), Dingo (W. H. Burrows 25 April 2000, pers.
comm.), Duaringa (Scanlan & Burrows 1990) and
Charters Towers (McIvor & Gardener 1995) districts
have demonstrated that initial pasture production is
improved two- to four-fold when woody plant
competition is removed from grazing lands (see
figure 4.8). These studies are generally conducted
over 510 years in southern and central parts of
Queensland. Much less is known about longevity of
responses in poorer areas such as those described
by Rae (1990). Some studies have indicated that
planting exotic pasture species may be more
economic than tree clearing (Gillard et al. 1989).
Safe stock-carrying capacity on treated areas can
be increased proportionately while still retaining
the same utilisation. Alternatively, the increased
pasture gives the landholder the flexibility to lower
overall property grazing pressure and so improve
individual animal performance. Increases of two to
threefold are recorded in cattle liveweight gain per
hectare after removal of eucalyptus species
Narrowleaf ironbarkdry
Silver-leaf ironbark
Narrow-leaf ironbarkwet
Poplar box
2500
Grass yeild (kg/ha)
Approximately 87% (173 000 000 ha) of

Queensland is covered by native pastures (Weston
et al. 1981). There are about 60 000 000 ha of
grazed woodland communities (Burrows et al.
1988b) and about 16 000 000 ha of national parks,
State forests and timber reserves which support
moderate to dense woodland or forest cover. The
original cover of forests, woodlands and shrublands
in the State is estimated to have been about
100 000 000 ha (Burrows et al. 1988a). Apart from
mulga, the shrubby dominants in these
communities are generally not palatable to
domestic livestock.
2000
2000
1500
1000
500
0
10
15
20
Tree basal area (m /ha)
Figure 4.8 Relationship between tree basal area and grass

yield in eucalypt woodlands of central Queensland. Provided
by J. C. Scanlan, based on Scanlan & Burrows (1990).
competition (Tothill 1983; Rae 1990). The extra

pasture may also lower the risk of soil erosion (by
increasing ground cover), provided the overall
utilisation levels (pasture eaten as a proportion of
pasture grown) are reduced. McIvor and Gardener
(1995) conducted a study on the effect of pasture
management options (including stocking rate) on
yield and botanical composition of pastures.
Basically, they found that legume-based pastures
have a higher carrying capacity and support higher
annual growth rates than native pastures. However,
productive native pastures that are predominantly
perennial grass could be maintained, providing
stocking rates were not excessive
(<0.20.25 steers/ha), so fewer destocking periods
would be required. Killing trees to increase herbage
production can increase carrying capacity of native
pasture and plots with live trees required
destocking for longer periods. Thus clearing may
increase livestock numbers per unit area, but
decrease the impact of those animals on pasture.
However, when extensive clearing is undertaken,
consideration must be given to potential problems
with salinity, loss of habitat for wildlife, regrowth
and costs of clearing.
The relative decrease in pasture production due to
the presence of trees is greatest in semiarid regions
(Walker et al. 1972; Beale 1973). In mulga areas, a
tree basal area of only 1 m2/ha reduced pasture
yields by 50% (Beale 1973). In central Queensland,
Scanlan and Burrows (1990) showed that the
impact of trees on production was greatest in areas
with lower potential. In central Queensland, a
reduction in pasture production of 50% occurred at
5 to 15 m2/ha, depending on fertility (Scanlan &
Burrows 1990; Walker et al. 1986). In the tropics,
soil fertility is relatively low, soil moisture
availability during the growing period is generally
high and the tree density is generally lower than in
southern parts of the State (Mott & Tothill 1984;
Holmes & Mott 1993). Under these circumstances,
83
trees appear to have less effect on pasture

production in north Queensland (Scanlan & McKeon
1993). McIvor and Gardener (1995) reported large
increases in pasture production on fertile clay soils
in north Queensland for 12 years following the
removal of trees during a period of both below
average and above average rainfall years.
Moisture competition is the most often cited reason
for reduced growth of pastures within woodlands,
and therefore Mott and Tothill (1984) suggest that
trees will have relatively less effect in areas where
there are fewer dry periods (soilwater stress
conditions) during the growing season. Recent
simulations using GRASP (McKeon et al.1990) have
indicated that rainfall distribution and soil depth
have a large impact on the degree of competition
between pastures and trees (Scanlan & McKeon
1993). Arguably nutrient competition is also vitally
important and should be considered in any
discussion of treegrass interactions. The two
factors are very closely linked, as trees take up
nutrients in the transpiration stream. The relative
contributions of these two factors can be examined
in models. However, the construction and
assumptions of models can have an impact on the
relative importance of these factors. See House et
al. (forthcoming) for a comparison of four models
of treegrass interactions.
An associated factor is that the total tree basal area
tends to be lower in northern parts of the State
than it is in comparable areas to the south. This
has been attributed to: the length of the dry season
causing mortality of young trees, leading to a
sparse woodland; and/or the widespread use or
occurrence of fire in tropical woodlands. Recent
12
C/13C ratio work suggests that the woodlands of
north Queensland were previously much more open
than at present (Burrows et al. 1998). The
reduction in fire frequency observed since the
1960s will tend to reinforce any long-term increase
in density of these woodlands. However, Fensham
and Holman (1999) consider whether the fluxes in
woodland density are caused by a change in the
fire regime, normal climatic cycles, changes in
cattle grazing (hence changes in the proportion of
wood and grass) or to carbon dioxide fertilisation
(see section 3.3).
84
Individual trees can have a variety of impacts on

pasture growth beneath their canopy and beyond
(Belsky et al. 1989; Belsky et al. 1993). These
effects vary from net increase, to no effect, to net
decrease (Scanlan 1992). When considering the
effect of trees at a landscape or paddock level,
there are a corresponding variety of relationships
that would be expected. Simulations from a model
developed by Scanlan (1992) include the concepts
of the stimulatory and competitive effect of trees
and produce the relationships shown in figure 4.9.
An individual tree produces some stimulation
effects on understorey species due to altered
temperature, humidity, soil physical and chemical

properties, and infiltration properties of the soil.
The tree also has competitive effects on the
understorey due to light interception, rainfall
interception, and soil, water and nutrient usage.
What is observed around and individual tree is the
net result of the counteracting effects. By
considering the relative strength of these
counteracting effects, the landscape-level
consequences of increasing tree density can be
simulated. If the net result is a decrease in
understorey production due to the presence of a
tree, the landscape-level response is that there is a
negative concave relationship between understorey
production and tree basal area. This is the
commonly observed situation in most eucalypt
communities in Queensland. If the net result is
increased understorey production, the landscapelevel response is an initial increase in understorey
production as tree basal area increases, followed by
a decline in production. At high tree basal area
values, the understorey production is less than the
production in the absence of trees. The reason for
this is that the stimulation of understorey
production reaches a maximum (e.g. the maximum
possible nutrient-use efficiency) and the addition of
more trees cannot increase production any more.
However, the competitive effect of trees (e.g. water
use) continues to increase. The overall effect is that
understorey production decreases from the
maximum as tree basal area increases.
Trees generate islands of increased fertility beneath
their canopy (Scholes & Archer 1997), with the
degree of soil change related to the period that
trees have occupied the site. In some countries,
human activity has caused woody composition
changes e.g. in Africa, areas of human inhabitation
during the Iron Age now support a woody
vegetation that is quite distinct from surrounding
areas (Blackmore et al. 1990).
There are several important situations where trees
have been reported as improving pasture growth.
Christie (1975) noted that only 6% of an area was
covered by the canopies of individual Eucalyptus
populnea in central-western Queensland, but that
this area produced about one quarter of the total
pasture growth if sown to buffel grass. Lowry
(1989) also noted increased growth beneath
Ziziphus mauritiana in north Queensland, while
Cameron et al. (1989) claimed no effect of young
Eucalyptus grandis trees soon after establishment on
growth of setaria-based pasture. Where trees are
planted in existing cleared areas, there is often no
effect of these trees or even a slight improvement.
At least part of this is associated with the
disturbance and/or fertilisation of the young trees.
When these trees increase in size (i.e. are no longer
seedlings), the competition they exert on pastures
increases (Cameron 1990). Some interesting results
are being obtained in areas where regrowth is being
left in narrow strips during blade ploughing
Pasture production (kg/ha)
(Chilcott et al. 1997). This was shown

experimentally where more favourable (higher
protein) grasses were found beneath trees when
compared to interspaces on similar soils in
eucalyptus woodlands in the Northern Tablelands
of New South Wales (Chilcott 2000).
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
10
20
30
40
50
Tree basal area (m /ha)
Figure 4.9 The herbaceous production (relative to that in

open areas) in simulated tree communities in which isolated
trees have a net stimulatory effect (top line), no net effect
(middle line) and a net competitive effect (bottom line).
Adapted from Scanlan (1992). Note that at high tree basal
areas, herbaceous production is reduced even where
individual isolated trees would stimulate production under
and near its canopy (top line).
operations (C. Chilcott 2000, pers. comm.,

12 January). In these areas, it will be important to
separate the direct effect of trees, the effects of the
disturbance during the ploughing operation and the
indirect effects of any management actions. It will
also be interesting to note any changes that may
occur as the regrowth increases in age and size
and requires more water and nutrients for growth.
Higher biomass yields under tree canopies than in
the open have been reported for Panicum maximum
(Kennard & Walker 1973; East & Feller 1993) and
buffel grass (Christie 1975; Shanker et al. 1976). In
Africa, Stuart-Hill et al. (1987) believed that the
shade of the canopy and leaf litter compensated for
both reduced rainfall beneath trees and soil moisture
competition, so that the net effect was enhanced
grass production. Also in Africa, Belsky et al. (1989,
1993) found that increased herbaceous-layer
production beneath canopies was associated with
lower soil temperatures and greater soil fertility.
It is undeniable that in most situations tree clearing
promotes increases in livestock production;
however, the long-term effects (both on- and offfarm) may not be apparent. The presence of
canopy cover can result in apparent lower levels of
pasture biomass, but this may not equate to lower
animal production (Walpole, 1999; Chilcott et al.
1997). Few studies have considered that shifts in
species composition towards more productive
grasses (higher digestibility and protein) may be
induced by trees. Canopy cover afforded by trees
reduces soil and air temperature, lowers
temperature extremes and reduces
evapotranspiration (Lynch & Donnelly 1980; Bird
et al. 1984; Young 1989; Dupont 1998). The lower
light environment and increased soil fertility can
lead to shifts towards more productive species in
the composition of the herbaceous layer. Higher
levels of woody litter beneath trees may also act as
a physical barrier to growth of large tufted grasses,
to favour more prostrate, smaller grasses and herbs
Little is known of the effect of trees on understorey

plant nutrients or on plant digestibility. Reductions
in soil and air temperature through shading have
been shown to increase growth and nitrogen uptake
of rundown, green panic pasture on brigalow clay
soils (Wilson et al. 1986). Minson (1990) has
shown experimentally that grass quality (e.g.
digestibility) increases when temperature
decreases, while Wilson and Wild (1991) show
shade effects on the nitrogen content of pastures.
Dupont (1998) found that 25% foliage projective
cover reduced air temperature by 1.30C across
central Queensland. This could lead to an increase
in grass digestibility of 1.3% and protein by 0.3%,
which could equate to an increase in liveweight
gain of approximately 30 kg/year (based on the
equations of Hendricksen et al. 1982).
Treegrass interaction may vary with tree age and
climatic fluctuation. Therefore trees may have net
facilitative effect on grasses in some years and a
net competitive effect in other years (Scholes &
Archer 1997). Current treegrass competition
models do not account for this, although the
capacity to predict variation in seasonal conditions
does exist. Predictions in GRASSMAN (Scanlan &
McKeon 1993) that estimate the impacts on grass
and animal production do not account for any
grass quality variation between wooded and
un-wooded systems. Further, benefits to animal
production from shade and shelter are not
accounted for, nor is the value of retaining timber
for harvesting and other environmental services.
Apart from increased animal production, advantages
from clearing woodlands and associated
management for livestock may include: lower overall
grazing pressure (lower stock numbers per unit of
forage produced); improved livestock handling
(Harrington et al. 1984a); and improved conditions
for some wildlife, for example, kangaroos are
believed to have increased since European settlement
(Newsome 1975; Poole 1978). There have been
substantial increases in pasture biomass production
from the introduction of exotic pasture species into
cleared areasespecially cleared Acacia spp. scrubs
(brigalow, gidgee and blackwood).
4.3.4 Improved pastures

Native pastures occupy most of northern Australias
land area offering forage and protection against
erosion (Gramshaw & Lloyd 1993). Native grasses
are suitable for extensive low cost production but
may be used in conjunction with another source of
feed to enable animals to meet increasingly strict
market specifications (Gramshaw 1995). In some
85
regions, climate or soil are adequate for an

improved pasture based on replacement of the
existing species or augmentation with a legume
(e.g. McIvor et al. 1991).
Replacing species
Grasses
Introduced grasses generally need reasonable soil
fertility to persist, and the soil must be cultivated to
remove existing competition for satisfactory
establishment (Partridge et al. 1994). This
competition would come from a dense tree
overstorey, for example, in the brigalow (Acacia
harpophylla) lands or rainforest (DPI 1976), or from
established perennial native grasses, for example
black speargrass (Hacker et al. 1982).
Introduced grasses are planted in fertile soils, as in
the brigalow lands, or in soils of lower fertility but
with higher rainfall. In the latter case, high stocking
rates can be used to justify fertilising (Mott &
Tothill 1984). Historically, rainforest and softwood
scrub were cleared to establish oversown pastures
for dairy production, as in coastal lands or on the
Atherton Tableland.
Similarly, most of the States brigalow lands have
been cleared, and introduced pastures such as
buffel grass, Rhodes grass and green panic sown
into the tree ash after a fire (Johnson 1964; DPI
1976). Following clearing, an influx of brigalow
regrowth can impact on pasture growth and may
make cattle management difficult (Anderson et al.
1984). Most brigalow regrowth can now be
controlled by blade ploughing (Scanlan & Anderson
1981). This has the added advantage of disturbing
the soil to release nitrogen and restore fertility
while allowing new pasture seed to be sown (e.g.
Blacket & Thompson 1992).
Legumes
On brigalow lands, soils have remained fertile
enough to maintain production of pure grass
pastures even though at a reduced level (Graham et
al. 1981). Nitrogen run-down can be alleviated
temporarily with soil disturbance (Robbins et al.
1986), or more permanently, by sowing a legume
able to tolerate the heavier soils.
A more recent approach has been to replace the
original brigalow species that is unpalatable to
domestic livestock, with a productive palatable
species (Leucaena leucocephala subsp. globata).
Leucaena is a tall shrub or small tree with foliage of
exceptional quality; its deep root system allows
green leaf to grow into the dry season, long after
the shallow-rooted grasses have ceased growing
(Wildin 1986; Partridge 1989). Tens of thousands of
hectares of leucaena have been planted in rows in
brigalow and downs country in central Queensland
to provide one of the most productive grazing
systems in the State (Gramshaw & Lloyd 1993;
Pengelly & Conway 2000). There is considerable
86
potential for expansion of these systems. They have

the added advantage of restoring most of the
ecosystem processes to levels analogous to those
originally in place in the original brigalow
community. Although it should be noted that
because they are expected to become naturalised
and self-sustaining populations under grazing
pressure, leucaena, as with other introduced
grasslegume pastures, is susceptible to becoming
weedy (Low 1999). While this is desirable for
production purposes, it can have implications for
non-production areas (see also section 4.2.2).
Investigations have been made into planting
individual or scattered useful trees such as Indian
siris (Albizia lebbeck) into pasture land. Fodder trees
like these have potential for improving quality (e.g.
Lowry 1989). However, the scale of feasible
planting is limited and care must be taken to
protect individual young trees from stock or fire.
Augmenting native grasses with legumes

Cattle on native pastures grow rapidly in early
summer for 24 months, until the grass starts to
flower or exhausts the available nitrogen in the soil
(McLennan et al. 1988). Thereafter, feed quality
declines rapidly and cattle frequently lose weight
during the winter. The animals diet can be
improved with protein-rich leaf from forage
legumes that may be oversown into the existing
native pasture after a fire (Miller et al. 1988).
The existing native pasture often occurs with intact
woodland in the north of the State, and where trees
have been thinned or removed in the south. Gillard
et al. (1989) suggested that augmenting native
pasture with a legume was likely to produce greater
financial gains than tree clearing in north
Queensland. Cook and Grimes (1977) reported that
trees have a relatively minor impact on the
establishment and yield of introduced pasture
species. By contrast, Cook and Ratcliff (1992)
showed that live trees depressed the establishment
of siratro (Macroptilium atropurpureum) in south-east
Queensland.
Unlike the phosphorus-demanding temperate
legumes (Trifolium and Medicago species) used in the
southern states, those sown in the tropics and
subtropics are hardy species (especially Stylosanthes
spp.) that can produce and persist in soils of low P
status (Partridge & Miller 1991). While they will
respond to the application of superphosphate, this
is rarely economical, and the cattle obtain the
mineral directly from supplements (McCosker &
Winks 1994). Because the general fertility and
stocking rates are lower than in the south,
production of nitrous oxide by the legume is lower,
and less fertility is transferred to cattle camps under
shade trees.
Nitrogen fixation by the legumes root nodule
bacteria can make soils more acid, especially on
light soils (Noble et al. 1998). This effect is likely to
Coates et al. (1997) demonstrated a marked

preference by cattle for green grass in pastures
oversown with Stylosanthes spp. during the wet
season. They also demonstrated that while
increases in stocking rate (without loss of animal
condition) could be made on those oversown
pastures in some cases, (depending on initial
stocking rates), excessive pressure may be placed
on perennial grasses where the species (such as
native tussock grass) are not tolerant of heavy
grazing pressure. The loss of perennial grass invites
ecological instability and increases the risk of soil
erosion (Mott & Tothill 1984). The grasslegume
balance is influenced by management (McIvor &
Gardener 1998) such as the rate of stocking, use of
fire, fertiliser application and timber treatment.
4.3.5 Regrowth management

The method of clearing and the regenerative
mechanisms of cleared vegetation will influence the
consequences of clearing.
Acacia harpophylla is a vegetative reproducer, and
the most common method of initial clearing is by
pulling a chain between two bulldozers (Johnson
1964; Scanlan 1988). This snaps most plants off at
ground level (unless the soil was very moist)
resulting in regrowth from roots or broken-off
stumps. If the initial clearing includes a ploughing
operation that kills most of the original plants, then
there is little regeneration in the future as
propagation from seed is uncommon among these
plants (Johnson 1964; DPI 1976).
Within eucalyptus communities, a common method
of tree treatment is to kill individual trees with stem
injection of a picloram-based aboricide (Scanlan
1988; Robertson & Beeston 1981). This allows for
selective treatment and retention of desirable trees.
The understorey population of seedlings and multistemmed suckers are left untouched. Under these
circumstances, there can be considerable growth of
these previously suppressed plants (see figure 4.10).
This may require a follow-up treatment on a regular
(1015 year) basis to maintain pasture production
(Burrows et al. 1988a). Increased use of chaining in
these communities can lead to rapid regrowth as
few, if any, plants are actually killed during the
chaining operation (Anderson et al. 1983).
The mulga lands of south-western Queensland are
a case where disturbance by grazing, mainly by
sheep, with some cattle, a period of rabbit
infestation, and a lack of regular fires have resulted
in a landscape that is becoming increasingly
dominated by understorey shrubs (Burrows et al.
1985; Howden et al. 1999).
Any increase in woody plant density and biomass

in woodlands is potentially detrimental in pastoral
production terms. This increase can arise from
disturbance to the ground layer in uncleared
woodlands, leading to an increased density
(thickening up) of existing populations (Burrows et
al. 1997); regeneration from seedlings and/or root
suckers, following mechanical or chemical control
of overstorey plants (Anderson et al. 1984); and
invasion of existing areas by native or exotic
species which did not occur there naturally
(Scanlan 1988; Robertson & Beeston 1981;
Harrington 1979). Such increases in woody plant
cover alter the structure and functioning of
ecosystems, for both production and conservation.
200
150
Number/ha
be most serious in legume-dominant paddocks and

least serious in unfertilised and grazed
grasslegume paddocks. Noble et al. (1998)
reported decreases in pH under Leucaena spp. over
a 20-year period, but the decrease was not as great
as that in nitrogen-fertilised pastures.
100
50
0
0 S MS 5
15
25
35
45
55
65
Size
Figure 4.10 Size class distribution (basal diameter cm) for a

eucalypt woodland in central Queensland. (S=seedling;
MS=multi-stemmed plant). Source: J. S. Scanlan.
Average basal area growth rates of 0.135 m2/ha/yr

in intact eucalypt woodlands (Burrows 1995) would
have little additional depressant effect on
understorey pasture production as it is already
greatly reduced by mature tree competition (see
figure 4.9 for greater than 10 m2/ha). Conversely,
regrowth rates following tractor pulling
(0.46 m2/ha/yr for poplar box) can reduce pasture
production by 50% within 11 years (figure 4.11).
Untreated brigalow suckers can reduce pasture
production to negligible amounts within 5 years of
pulling when tree basal area approaches 2m2/ha
(Scanlan 1984figure 4.12).
The reduction in pasture production per unit of
regrowth tree basal area is greater than per unit of
mature tree basal area. This is related to tree
allometry, where more leaf is supported per unit of
tree basal area for small trees than for larger trees
(Scanlan 1991). The amount of tree leaf is directly
related to sapwood basal areathe cross-sectional
area of tree stems that is directly involved in
conducting water to the leaves. As trees mature,
the proportion of tree basal area made up of
sapwood decreases.
87
2000
An increase in liveweight of stock of 0.3 kg/ha

can be obtained initially after burning. This gain
may be lost later in the growing period as the
burnt pasture matures, resulting in a lower
difference in liveweight gains between burnt and
unburnt pasture overall (Ash et al. 1982).
Determining pasture composition: it has been
long recognised that the black speargrass lands
of coastal and subcoastal Queensland are
encouraged or maintained by burning (Tothill
1971). Recent studies by Orr and Paton (1997)
have shown the importance of the combination
of burning and grazing to the restoration of
species composition from Aristida- to Heteropogon
contortus-dominant pasture.
Reducing the impact of native and exotic woody
shrubs and plants: these plants may be killed by
burning , for example, rubber vine (Cryptostegia
grandiflora) (Vitelli 1992; Bebawi et al. 2000;
Grice 1997) or scorched or burnt to ground level
by firemost eucalyptus species (Scanlan 1988).
Landholders attitude to the use of fire as a
management tool changes over time, and varies
with vegetation community type. This has been
noted as follows:
88
In semiarid areas, the standing fodder is

regarded as a bank of forage, which can be
consumed until the next growth period (Partridge
1999). This attitude prevails even on properties
large enough to allow for a burning regime to be
implemented with little risk. There is a
Grass yield (kg/ha)
1500
60
1000
40
500
20
0
5
10
15
20
Tree basal area (m2/ha)
Figure 4.11 Treegrass relationships in mature woodlands in

central Queensland. Data for poplar box from Scanlan and
McKeon (1990).
5000
100
80
4000
% of open areas
pasture yield
3000
60
2000
40
1000
20
Loss of pasture (% of open areas)
Fire can be a useful management tool in grazing

lands. Demonstrated benefits include:
80
Grass yield (kg/ha)
Most vegetation communities in Queensland

experienced regular fires prior to the establishment
of a grazing industry, due to lightning strikes and
use of fire by Aboriginal people (Kimber 1983).
Bowman (1998) provides a good review on
evidence of Indigenous burning). Rainforests, and
some arid community types, would have been the
exceptions, but even in these cases, historically,
high-intensity fires would have occurred
infrequently (Harrington et al. 1984b). Fire differs
from many other environmental stresses in that it
can occur infrequently (e.g. 550 years apart) and
irregularly, for only a short period, is selfpropagating, and can also kill all above-ground
parts of a plant. Fire has an effect on plant ecology,
the extent of which depends on fire intensity,
frequency and the season of occurrence. Individual
species may be adapted to particular combinations
of these three variables (fire regimes). The
interaction between an adaptive trait and a regime
may facilitate survival or reproduction (Gill 1975).
Fire is valued in different ways by the community.
Scientists may be concerned with its effect on the
ecosystem, whereas the recreationist may be
concerned with amenity.
100
% of open areas
pasture yield
Loss of pasture (% of open areas)
4.3.6 Fire
0
0
4
6
8
Tree basal area (m2/ha)
10
Figure 4.12 Treegrass relationships in brigalow regrowth on

a clayloam surfaced duplex near Theodore, Queensland.
Data from Scanlan (1991).
reluctance to burn this forage as this could

impose drought conditions if rain during the
next growing season is minimal. A related
concern is that in some areas, once a fire has
started, it can be very difficult to stop. Both these
issues are a major factor in the Mitchell Grass
Downs communities of western Queensland
(Scanlan 1980). Furthermore, in the more arid
landscapes, the long-term effects of fire are
uncertain and it is believed fire could adversely
affect some vegetation communities (Turner &
McDonald 1993).
In tropical parts of the State, where rainfall is
more reliable, burning is still a common feature
of property management (Partridge 1999).
Pasture growth is rapid and nutrient levels of
soils are often low and these combine to produce
bulky, low quality feed for stock. Fire removes

the large bulk of dry matter and allows easier
access to green feed.
In coastal and subcoastal parts of the State, the
attitude to fire has changed considerably since
the 1960s. Prior to that period, fire was used
extensively to remove dry forage of low quality
allowing access to green feed; and to help
control ticks; to help keep regrowth in check
(Mott & Tothill 1984). With the advent of
brahman-infused livestock and supplements, dry
forage became a useable resource and the
frequency of burning decreased. A direct
consequence of this has been the increase in
density and size of native species that were
previously controlled by regular burning regimes
(Anderson et al. 1988). An associated
consequence has been the increased survival of
cattle with increased body weight leading to
increased demand for dry matter (McKeon et al.
1990). This increases pasture usage, thereby
decreasing the opportunity to burn off, even
when the landholder is not averse to using fire.
4.3.7 Timber production and farm

forestry
Maintenance of a supply of useable timber is a
concern to many landholders in Queensland. Many
millions of tonnes of timber were burned during the
time of the Brigalow Development Scheme in central
Queensland, because at that time there was no
commercial use for the timber (Johnson 1964). The
same situation exists with much of the clearing of
eucalypt woodlands at present. The benefit of
retaining and managing native vegetation for its
timber and other commercial values is only now
beginning to be realised. Farm forestry has been
defined as the growth and management of trees on
farms, as part of the farm enterprise, for the purpose
of producing wood and/or non-wood products
(NAFI 1997). Farm forestry includes wood and nonwood production from both native forests and
plantations and offers a commercial incentive for the
sustainable management of this vegetation (Greening
Australia 1996). Investment in farm forestry has
been projected to provide a significant boost to
regional economies. For example, in Victoria,
modelling studies estimated that farm forestry would
increase regional income by 4.8%, or $302 million,
and create 5748 new jobs (RIRDC 1998).
Based on the National Forest Policy definition of
forest7, Queensland has around 49 000 000 ha of
native forest, or 28% of the States total land area.
The vast majority of this area is in some way
managed by the private sector, where 49% is
private leasehold and 35% is privately owned. The
remainder of the States forest is about 8% public
forests that are managed for timber production, 6%
within conservation reserves, and 2% is other
Crown land (DPIE 1998a).
For timber management purposes, most

commercial native forests may be simply classified
as wet or dry sclerophyll eucalypt or and cypress
pine forest (Taylor & Nester 2000). The commercial
log productivity of these forests ranges from less
than 1 m3/ha/yr for most cypress and dry
sclerophyll forest types, to more than 3 m3/ha/yr in
wet sclerophyll forests (Taylor & Nester 2000).
Across all private native forests this productivity
has a recorded yield of about 200 000 m3/year
(Parsons 1999). This has declined from a peak of
about 600 000 m3/year since 1950 (Parson 1999).
Appropriate silvicultural treatment provides the
opportunity to increase the productivity rates in all
forest types (Henry, in Taylor & Nester 2000). New
perspectives on commerciality, markets and
productivity are emerging as non-traditional
owners of wood and non-wood resources,
particularly in western Queensland, begin to
develop new markets and products (Fairbairn
2000). The aim of the Western Queensland
Hardwoods project is to develop a new resource
from an area of native vegetation previously
regarded as having a lesser value.
The production of millable timber tends to
dominate discussions on forest management,
however, a substantial volume of other wood fibre
products is harvested such as: sleepers, power
poles, landscape timbers, firewood, fencing timbers
and woodturning timbers (see Taylor (1994) for a
general coverage of forestry in Queensland, and
section 4.3.8 Alternative products). A significant
operation also revolves around honey production
and the flower, gumnut and leaf markets (Anderson
1993). For example, in the 111 000 ha of the DPI
Forestry Beerburrum district, foliage harvesting
licences return approximately $100 000 per annum
and the 523 registered apiary sites generate over
$27 000 annually. All of these products require
planning for their sustainable use and management
to maximise grower returns. The use of farm timber
for fencing, yard building and other infrastructure
is an important use for tree products. This
importance is recognised in the Land Act 1994 (Qld)
(and its predecessor), where timber for
construction purposes is regarded separately in
terms of the permit application process for
leasehold land.
The wet/dry sclerophyll forest distinction also
indicates aspects of the ecology of the forest types
that influence native forest silvicultural practices.
These differences in species composition, seed
germination, seedling establishment, presence of
lignotubers, gap-phase behaviour, competition and
fire responses affect selective tree marking,
harvesting operations and stand-management
practices employed in each forest type (Taylor &
Nester 2000). Early research in these forest types
on Crown land saw the development of silvicultural
systems for their sustainable management. These
89
systems have been refined over time to produce

multiple use management objectives. These
principles of management, such as selective
harvesting and silvicultural treatment, have largely
been adopted on private land, however, with
varying results. The simplified aims of private native
forest managers, of wood production principally,
have led to the development of more intensive
silvicultural regimes. The production of pasture in
association with timber, and landowners
requirements for a more regular income than the
State system delivers, has led to a shorter
harvesting interval and more intensive thinning.
With some selective overstorey removal, possible
regeneration fires and judicious removal of poor
stems, the growth rates of selected retained stems
can be improved and hence the return period
shortened. In cypress pine (Callitris glaucophylla)
areas, seedling establishment can be at such a
density that some thinning should be carried out to
ensure that the remaining trees grow and form
useable timber (Johnston 1975). Cypress pine
seedlings may require only a low intensity fire to
kill them, as they are particularly susceptible to fire
(Johnston 1987). In other woodland communities,
the unwanted timber may have to be removed by
chemical means in order to reduce competition and
allow adequate growth rates. See table 4.5 for
spotted gum (Corymbia citriodora) and cypress pine.
Note that individual tree production is greatest at the
lowest density (widest spacing) but that production
per hectare is greatest at moderate to high tree
densities. Therefore, the appropriate density of
trees to retain will depend on the type of product.
Some research has been conducted into

agroforestry (e.g. Cameron et al. 1989), but only a
small area in the State is managed as agroforestry.
In grazing lands, there can be considerable damage
done to young tree saplings and this more than
outweighs the financial benefits of grazing these
areas while trees are young and are having a
relatively small impact on pasture production. Once
trees become large and the tree canopy approaches
closure, pasture production in the understorey is
reduced and potential animal production decreases.
Farm forestry and the sustainable management of
native forests are supported at a State and national
level by various policy initiatives and funding
programs. International factors include:
Global Marketsglobal market conditions seem
to indicate a positive scenario for wood fibre
production (CIE 1997). Australia and Queensland
are both currently significant net importers of
forest products. In 199495 Australias net deficit
was about $1.7 billion and Queenslands balance
was $287 million of which 47% was paper and
paper product imports (DPI 1998). In broad
terms, there may be opportunities to supply
internationally competitively priced products to
meet the domestic demand for a range of
traditional forest products.
Carbon Tradingthere is some expectation that
carbon trading will provide additional income to
some areas of farm forestry with an as yet
indefinite value (Francis 2000). It is also possible,
but less certain, that these benefits will apply to
managed areas of regrowth native forest.
Montreal ProcessAs a signatory to the
Montreal Process Australia agreed, in 1995, to
adopt the use of a comprehensive framework for
monitoring the conservation and sustainable
management of its native forest (AFFA 1997).
The Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management
principles used for this process are embodied in
Queensland in the Code of Practice for Native
Forest Timber Production (DNR 1999c).
These results show that by effectively managing a

forest, the volume of wood produced on a per
hectare basis can be substantially increased. This
increase is then available for harvest to maintain
productivity.
Table 4.5 Effect of tree spacing on individual tree growth (dbhdiameter at breast height) and forest growth (volume
increment per area). Data from Department of Primary Industries Forest Service western experiments.
Spacing regime
90
Cypress pine
dbh cm/yr
Cypress pine
m3/ha/yr
Spotted gum
dbh cm/yr
Spotted gum
m3/ha/yr
Unmanaged
0.07
0.17
0.18
0.3
Bulloak removal
0.21
0.87
4x4
0.23
2.4
5x5
0.27
2.2
6x6
0.28
2.0
0.41
0.7
7x7
0.31
1.8
8x8
0.57
0.7
10 x 10
0.59
0.5
12 x 12
0.74
0.5
14 x 14
0.83
0.5
Certification and Labelling of Forest Products

international pressure is growing for the
development of a certification and labelling
scheme that enables buyers of forest products to
be aware of how the sustainable production of a
particular product is in comparison to other
products on the market (Fortech 1997). These
developments may provide a useful marketing
opportunity for promoting products derived from
sustainably harvested and managed native
forests and plantations.
At a national level, a number of policy documents
may affect the development of farm forestry. In
1992, the Federal, State and Territory governments
signed the National Forestry Policy StatementA
new focus for Australias forests. This statement,
which describes a nationally agreed set of objectives
and policies for Australias public and private
forests, has been the founding policy document for
the development of farm forestry. Under 11 national
goals with numerous specific objectives, it has set
the development of public and private forests within
the context of ecologically sustainable development
and recognises the need to develop the forestry and
wood production industry. It has seen the
implementation of the Comprehensive Regional
Assessment process and the development of a
number of Regional Forest Agreements, which aim
to provide resource security for native forest
dependent producers, while ensuring there is an
ecologically sustainable system of reserves
established (Commonwealth of Australia 1992a).
The South East Queensland Regional Forest
Agreement was achieved in 1999. It is expected that
this agreement will promote the rapid expansion of
hardwood plantations in south-east Queensland.
Key elements of the agreement include:
a transition to plantation forests for hardwood
supply over 25 years
no logging of old growth or wilderness and no
clearfelling
an end to all logging in Crown native forests in
south-east Queensland by the year 2024
government will facilitate and provide incentives
for ecologically sustainable management of
forests and timber resources on private land.
In contrast to Western Australia, South Australia,
Victoria and southern New South Wales, the focus
of plantation farm forestry in Queensland has been
on a range of local native hardwood species rather
than on exotic pine or non-local eucalypt species.
The Queensland Forest Research Institute (QFRI)
lists 17 hardwood species for attention in their
Private Plantations Initiative (Lee et al. 2000) and
recent publications advocate the use of a range of
best bet species (Sewell 1997), most of which are
locally native species. If plantation farm forestry
does become a common land use on suitable
cleared land in rural Queensland using a wide
range of locally native species, this may help in the

partial restoration of threatened ecosystems and
the buffering of remnant vegetation.
Traditionally plantations in Queensland have been
government-owned and funded monoculture
plantings using exotic and native pine species. The
development of landholder-driven farm forestry, the
scope of the Private Plantations Initiative (Lee et al.
2000) and expressed landholder preferences
(Harrison et al. 1997) for mixed native species
planting, clearly indicate that a significantly larger
range of locally native species are likely to be used
in the future. The broadscale replanting of the
preclearing dominant tree species on cleared land
provides for a partial reintroduction of the
vegetation communities of regional ecosystems.
This partial restoration can be enhanced by the use
of an appropriate range of mixed species in the
plantation or a number of small monoculture plots
of different locally endemic species.
The strategic placement of plantations adjacent or
close to remnant vegetation can remove or reduce a
number of the threats to remnant vegetation, such
as reduced edge effects and improved fire
management. Long, thin or scattered remnants can
effectively be aggregated into much larger, less
vulnerable areas with sympathetically developed
and managed native hardwood plantations. Other
ecological threats to remnants, such as weed and
feral animal pests, may not necessarily be reduced
by the proximity of such plantations.
Carr and Jenkins (2000) have presented a
revegetation model that includes plantations and
argue that there are a range of compromises which
can be made to capitalise on the multiple benefits
of revegetation activities. Table 4.6 illustrates a
range of common revegetation activities practiced
in Australia and shows some of the compromises
which can be made.
Lamb (1997) has identified several opportunities for
broadscale biodiversity restoration with long
rotation sawlog plantations:
use of native species instead of exotic species
embedding of monoculture plantations in a
matrix of intact or restored forest
use of several species and creation of a mosaic
of monocultures across the landscape instead of
a single plantation
use of species mixtures instead of plantation
monocultures
fostering and management of the diverse
understoreys that often develop below the
canopy of plantations.
These more biologically diverse plantations can
continue to be managed for biodiversity beyond the
life of the first rotation. Management options
include:
the use of selective harvesting to recover the
plantation cost and then manage for biodiversity
91
Allowing the dormant understorey species to

grow and join the plantation canopy and
managing the result as a mixed species forest
Using the plantation as a means of accelerated
successional developmentdo not harvest and
manage for biodiversity (Lamb 1997).
While many private native forest areas are
principally managed for wood, grazing or nonwood production, there is also the potential for the
application of ecologically sound remnant
vegetation management principles to maximise the
conservation outcomes from the native forest area.
Table 4.6 The effects on commercial revegetation, natural resource conservation and farm enhancement in a range of
revegetation models and some possible modifications to allow the capture of multiple benefits (Carr & Jenkins, 2000).
Revegetation model
Commercial
revegetation
Natural resource
conservation
Farm
enhancement
Possible
modifications
1. Exotic species
plantation on farm (for
timber, fodder, firewood
etc.)
Lower establishment
costs, cheaper fencing,
better tree form, higher
returns, easier
management. Usually
large area >40 ha
Positive: greenhouse gas

uptake, some habitat value,
may reduce recharge of
groundwater, may intercept
nutrients
Positive: some shelter

and shade, lowest
croptree interface
Use native or locally

indigenous species
Wide spacing
Incorporate habitat
blocks
Place on cleared or
degraded land
2. Native species
plantation on farm
(for timber, fodder,
firewood, cut flowers,
foliage, bushfood,
oil, etc.)
Lower establishment
costs, cheaper fencing,
better tree form, higher
returns, easier
management and
harvest. Usually large
area >40 ha
Positive: CO2 sequestration,

more habitat value than
model 1, corridor potential,
may reduce recharge and
intercept nutrients
3. Locally indigenous
species plantation on
farm (for timber, fodder,
firewood, cut flowers,
foliage, bushfood, oil,
etc.)
Timber production may

be reduced, species best
adapted for local
conditions, optimum
methods applied for
growth

greater habitat value than
models 1 and 2, corridor
potential, may reduce recharge
and intercept nutrients
Positive: some
windbreak and shelter
benefit, lowest croptree
interface, blends into
rural landscape better
Negative: may displace natural,

age-diverse stands, temporary
Negative: reduced
pasture
4. Timberbelts and
shelter belts
Positive: quality timber

production, able to cover
large areas, less
competition between
trees
Positive: corridor potential

(depending on species), CO2
sequestration, habitat potential,
maximum nutrient and
groundwater interception
Negative: compromise in
silviculture (more
thinning and pruning),
poorer tree form on
edges
Negative: may draw wildlife

out of habitat areas, weed or
genetic pollution potential as
for plantations depending on
species, increased edge effects
Positive: high windbreak

and shade effect, utilises
existing fences, follows
natural and man-made
features (creeks,
contours, roads), spreads
risk
Positive: existing
resource, large logs,
lower management
requirements, no
establishment costs
Positive: high habitat and

wildlife values, diversity of
species, can be managed to
improve biodiversity, forest
managed, rather than cleared
Negative: slow growth

rates, compliance with
native vegetation
legislation, greater
harvesting cost
Negative: management can

reduce diversity and habitat
values, increased fire frequency,
spread of weeds through
disturbance
5. Managed native
forest
92
Negative: may attract exotic

fauna, may displace existing
ecosystem, temporary,
suppressed understorey, weed
potential
Negative: may displace existing

ecosystem, risk of genetic
pollution, temporary
Negative: reduced
pasture, changes rural
landscape aesthetics
Positive: some
windbreak and shelter
benefit, lowest croptree
interface
Negative: reduced
pasture, changes rural
landscape aesthetics
Negative: high crop-tree

interface, high fencing
costs
Positive: blends into

existing landscape,
shelter and shade values,
some grazing value
Negative: greater fire
risk, pasture competition,
potential for regeneration
in agricultural production
areas
Use locally indigenous

species
Wide spacing
Use a mix of species
Place on cleared land
Plant annually
Use best performing seed

families of local
provenances
Place on cleared land
Wide spacing
Use temporary electric

fencing
Use local species for
shelter and timber rows
Plant outer rows with
shelter species
Choose species which
compete less with
adjacent pastures and
crops
Can have shelter or
timber emphasis
Remove less trees
Retain understorey
Manage for wildlife
Prune best trees
Thin to increase
production
Fence out livestock
Table 4.6 Continued.

Revegetation model
Commercial
revegetation
Natural resource
conservation
Farm
enhancement
Possible
modifications
6. Managed native
regeneration
Positive: no
establishment costs
turns a problem into a
resource
Positive: increased species and

age diversity, can be managed
for increased understorey,
regrowth managed, rather than
cleared
Positive: can be
managed for increased
pasture, increased shelter
as stands are opened up,
reduced clearing costs
Negative: seedlings not

naturally selected, decreasing
tree density may disadvantage
some species of flora and fauna
Negative: thinnings may

be a fire hazard
Encourage diversity
Thin for timber or
pasture
Allow grazing
Exclude grazing
Fertilise trees
Positive: fast growth

encouraged
Positive: increased biodiversity

and habitat, corridor potential
Negative: not in optimal

areas for timber
production, pruning and
thinning regime may be
different
Negative: species variety may

be limited in discharge zones
Positive: cheap
compared with
engineering solutions,
long-term, slows the
decline of agricultural
land
Use salt tolerant species

Use commercial species
Can easily include local
shrubs and trees
Positive: best trees can

be pruned for timber,
seed source

increase wildlife numbers and
resilience, maintain biodiversity,
reverse tree decline, aesthetics
Positive: Pest control,

shelter for pastures,
crops and stock,
contributes to stability of
agricultural ecosystems,
aesthetics
Incorporate some local

commercial species
Harvest logs of high
value species
Manage weeds and feral
animals
Sell seed
Positive: highest pasture

component of all designs,
good stock shade and
some shelter
Utilise select planting

material,
Stagger plantings
Fence whole paddock
until trees establish
Negative: no control on
species, high
management costs, slow
growth rates (depending
on species), large waste
component
7. Salinity or erosion
control planting
8. Habitat planting
Negative: slow growth

rates, may not be
optimal timber species
9. Wide-spaced
agroforestry
Positive: low competition

between trees
Negative: high pruning
costs, no competition to
force trees to grow
straight
Negative: may harbour feral

animals and weeds if not
managed properly
nutrient recycling, habitat for
some species
Negative: Poor habitat for most
species, relies on exotic species
4.3.8 Alternative products

Retaining, replanting or rehabilitating native
vegetation may offer ecological and economic
benefits through new crops, diversified agriculture
or alternative products such as:
timber
bushfoods
ecotourism
oils, gums and resins
tannins and dyes
medicinal and pharmaceutical compounds
bee keeping and honey production
landscape and horticultural materials and
products
native seed production
integrated pest management agents
gene improvement and breeding programs
cultural and heritage products and services.
The incorporation of native vegetation alternative
products into production systems and practices
may simultaneously provide conservation benefits.
Table 4.7 summarises some of the current and
potential alternative products from native
vegetation. It is by no means exhaustive, but is to
be seen as a starting point.
Negative: high tree

protection costs
4.4 Other values of native

vegetation
4.4.1 Non-value benefits
Benefits from retaining native vegetation clearly fall
into two categoriesmeasurable shorter term
economic benefits to the landholder and the
community, and desirable medium to long-term
benefits that are not easily measured, or impact
either on the farm or beyond the farm gate.
Benefits to the whole of society include aesthetic
and amenity benefits. Little research has examined
these, although efforts to quantify such benefits are
discussed in section 5.2. Implicit to many
arguments for vegetation retention for this purpose,
are discussions on ecotourism (see section 4.3.8).
Section 4.3 examined in detail some of the on-farm
benefits of native vegetation for production,
including income diversification and alternative
products. Section 5.2 explores further economic
quantifications of these values. At the property
level, vegetation has a number of other values that
are more difficult to quantify, including ecosystem
processes (nutrient retention, nutrient cycling, and
the maintenance or enhancement of soil fertility
and biological status; see also section 3.2) and
scenic and amenity values. Implicit in the
arguments for retention of native vegetation in
agro-ecosystems, is the need to maintain ecosystem
services. Retention of vegetation provides benefits
93
Table 4.7 Alternative products from native vegetation

Product
Reference/s and resources
Comments and uses
1) wood/timber, valueadded resources
Forest Facts (2000) WA - CALM
1) Examples: timber, charcoal, fuelwood

broombush (Melaleuca uncinata)
2) Specialty timbers
2) Fairbairn (1999)
2) Uses: fine furniture, cabinet making; parquetry flooring;

veneering ; musical instrument/s or components of
musical instruments; carbon-storage potential; decorative
wooden objects (such as vases, lamp shades, pens,
serviette holders, coasters, wine goblets, platters, bowls,
potpourri bowls, wooden toys, canisters and clocks);
gun-stocks, knife handles, lidded boxes; wood carvings
made from western timbers; wood pieces for turning
(hobby); architectural fittings and souvenir items
Oils, gums and resins
Anderson (1993); Archer (1997); Murtagh

(1998); Plummer & Considine (1997)
Essential oils (eg Backhousia citriodora and

Melaleuca alternifolia)
Medicinal and
pharmaceutical products
1) Herbal Medicines Research and Education

Centre, Sydney
1) Herbal medicines; anti-cancer drugs;

antioxidant-action mechanisms;
cardiovascular drugs
Timber
Anderson (1993); Bulman et al. (1998);
Fairbairn (1999): Australian National
University (1998); Sewell (1997)
other: Anderson (1993); Parnell (2000);

Purbrick (1998)
Floriculture
Wildflowers
Cut flowers
Foliage etc.
1) Export Flora Australia

2) Flower Export Council of Australia Inc.
3) Other: Johnson (1996); Karingal
Consultants (1994)
Plummer & Considine (1997); Sedgley &
Horlock (1998)
Native/bushfood products
1) Anderson (1993)
1) Bark and cork
2) Anderson (1993); Phelps (1999b)
2) Leaf
3) Anderson (1993)
3) Flowers
4) Fruits
4) Anderson (1993); Flynn (2000) eg riberry

Phelps (1999b)
5) Nuts
5) Anderson (1993)
6) Seeds
6) Anderson (1993); Phelps (1999b)
7) General
7) Anderson (1993); Flynn (2000)

Graham & Hart (1998)
8) Extracts, spices, foods

and oils
Anderson (1993); CAST (1999); Parnell (2000)
Landscaping and
horticultural materials and
sources
1) Eg Blue Grass Themeda australis var.

Mingo (Burkes Backyard Fact Sheet 2000)
2) Rayner (2000)
Schmitt (2000)
1) Indigenous culture and

heritage
2) Farm and home-stay
businesses
3) Historical and landscape
heritage
94
2) Fresh and dried native flowers, foliage etc.
8) Rayner (2000); McCarthy (1995)

Phelps (1999a)
Beekeeping and honey

production
Cultural and heritage

products and services
1) Australian native plants: products and services
Integrated pest management
Tilman and Duvick (1999)
Gene improvement, breeding

programs, scientific research
Brown (1997); Tilman & Duvick (1999)
Roadside revegetation,
transport and utility
corridor rehabilitation
and revegetation
Brown (1997)
Tourism and ecotourism
Industry Sciences Resources (1999)

Queensland Tourism and Travel Corporation
(1998); Tilman & Duvick (1999)
1) Native gardens and groundcovers
for the conservation of biological diversity, for

example, through the provision of habitats absent in
treeless landscapes (Chilcott et al. 1997).
the introduction and spread of exotic species.

However, remaining remnant vegetation can be
highly significant.
The value of property may be enhanced with the

retention of remnant vegetation. Premiums of up to
20% on the value of properties in the central wheat
belt of Western Australia are expected for
properties with elaborate investments in
windbreaks, fodder shrubs and perennial pastures
for wind erosion and salinisation control (Kubicki et
al. 1993). Similar premiums may be available for
properties with a high proportion of native
vegetation in over-cleared parts of south-eastern
Australia (Reid 1997).
Management of the tree clearing issue in the southeast Queensland coastal zone has been a
significant environmental issue for at least the last
decade (Catterall & Kingston 1993). Many parallels
can be drawn between the planning initiatives that
have been developed during the last ten years and
those being considered now in rural environments.
Analysis has shown that, while the south-east
Queensland region has not lost the same absolute
area of land from tree clearing as rural
environments, it has placed a considerable amount
of the regions biodiversity values at risk and still
threatens many of the more stable ecosystems,
species and populations that remain (see box 6.2).
Many desirable aspects of retaining natural

vegetation revolve around benefits to the whole of
society as well as to the long-term sustainability
and health of the property itself. In an environment
of economic survival, many landholders make
individual decisions that may be beneficial
(essential) to them in the short-term, but which
may be disadvantageous on the property and to the
wider community in the longer-term. Salting from
clearing of vegetation in recharge areas resulting in
rising watertables and expression of salinity, is an
extreme example in this regard. However,
landholders generally accept that these major
impacts are counter-productive (e.g.Virtual
Consulting Group and Griffin nrm 2000).
Values of vegetation in urban areas can include

shade for public and private recreation areas,
landscape amenity, visual pollution barriers,
catchment protection and control of soil degradation.
The maintenance of species diversity (flora and

fauna), achieved by retaining native vegetation, is
highly desirable for bioregions, the community, and
as an essential element of State and national
obligations. In some cases, landholders consider
that this has limited direct benefit for them
individually, and that, in fact, it may reduce
potential agricultural or grazing productivity in the
short term. Thus there is a perception that there is
little incentive to manage lands for biodiversity
purposes, especially if there is an associated
negative impact on production or management.
However, some grazing companies are effectively
working with conservation agencies in a
cooperative, mutually beneficial manner (Wim
Burggraafkeynote presentation at Katherine
Rangeland Conference 1994).
4.4.2 Urban and peri-urban

The primary focus of this review has been on rural
land use and management, but it is important to
note urban and peri-urban uses of vegetation.
Vegetation clearing in urban and peri-urban areas
is still a key threat to the States biodiversity. Many
urban areas are developed in highly diverse,
productive areas, particularly lowland coastal
areas; and this can have devastating impacts on
local fauna and flora. Urban development usually
involves complete destruction or high levels of
modification and fragmentation of vegetation, and
95
The following is a summary of the tree-clearing issue in Brisbane City over the past 100 years.
Initial clearing of the central city and inner suburban area, followed by clearing of patches of rainforest
along the Brisbane River and waterways, for timber extraction and for agricultural purposes was mostly
complete by the 1870s. Most of Brisbanes lowland rainforest (closed forest) was cleared by 1900 and
most of the lowland eucalypt open forest by 1946. Most of the melaleuca woodland/wetland was
cleared by the1960s.
Clearing and thinning of eucalypt forests across the city for hardwood to be used in the construction of
new homes was mostly complete by the 1930s. Facilitation of economic development and urban growth,
at the expense of natural area loss was to remain an overriding priority for the remainder of the
century. There were some early examples of visionary thinking about the need to protect a green belt
around the city by individuals such as the former Lord Mayor, William Jolly.
Expansion of the city and middle suburbs and the consequential clearing of intact and thinned forests
and further thinning of outlying areas was mostly complete by the 1950s. Clearing, draining and land
reclamation of much of the citys low-lying areas containing most of the freshwater wetlands, melaleuca
woodlands and open forests (primarily for airport construction, but also housing and other
infrastructure) was mostly complete by the 1960s. Quarrying sites were developed across the city in
forested foothill localities. At this time, a decline in the abundance and diversity of species and their
habitats was largely unrecognised by the community except for specialist interest groups and
individuals.
Expansion of clearing into areas of steeper lands, such as Mt Coot-tha. Rapid expansion of the city
north and south into areas of former cleared land and remnant bushland with few planning or other
constraints. There was the growth of a high speed network of roads across and out of the city. The
introduction of new varieties of ornamental plants in gardens was strongly promoted, many with
unrecognised weed potential (sleeper weeds), cane toad numbers were steadily increasing and the
growing of native plants in gardens was becoming popular, partly in response to rapid loss of bushland.
There was growing community concern about the rapid loss of habitat in the Greater Brisbane area. All
this was well under way by the 1970s.
Implementation of the Brisbane Wildlife Survey, Brisbane City Council (BCC) and community
involvement in 1981. Publication of the results and a book; the Brisbane Wildlife Survey represented a
milestone in community environmental education. Clearing of 50% of koala habitat took place in the
Leslie Harrison Dam catchment during the 1980s for rural acreage development. BCC land with
bushland value was sold for residential development. Studies and reports by BCC all came to the same
basic conclusion: half the citys bushland and wetland was in private ownership, none of the existing
measures were likely to be effective in protecting it, and there was a strong community mandate to
introduce new bushland protection measures.
There was strong community opposition to residential development pressure and clearing of privately
owned bushland on the face of Mt Coot-tha; Council refusal of development, and commencement of the
Bushland Acquisition Program (BAP) in 1989. Since 1991, there has been a progressive adoption of
elements of a comprehensive bushland protection strategy; the acceleration of the BAP, retention of
Council land with bushland value, strengthening of town planning measures and vegetation protection
laws, initiation of community participation in bushland management and environmental educational
programs, and introduction of initiatives and incentives for owners of privately owned bushland, a
combination which contributed to a slowing in the rate of bushland and habitat loss. Creation of a
number of major natural area reserves and achievement of interim planning protection goals by the end
of the 1990s.
At present there is continuation of the above protection initiatives, mixed level of commitment by
different levels and sections of government and community to considering biodiversity beyond the
immediate, growing recognition of the need to coordinate efforts with south-east Queensland councils at
a regional level, monitor progress and anticipate emerging management issues (such as fire, ferals and
weeds), and apply the precautionary principle. There are changing conservation priorities including the
need to promote duty of care by all landholders to better manage environmental values on off-reserve
land with high habitat value.
Box 4. 2 Case study: history of tree clearing issue in Brisbane City
96
return to contents
Social and economic issues
Contributors
Rural social issues
Lyn Aitken, Department of Natural Resources
An economic analysis of broadscale tree clearing in Queensland
John Rolfe, Central Queensland University
97
Summary
In this section, the social and economic dimensions
of native vegetation management are discussed.
Some of the most critical barriers to natural
resource management are social and these are
discussed under the headings of socioeconomic
issues, values, social issues and sustainability,
community involvement issues and communication
and partnerships in section 5.1. Section 5.2
provides an economic analysis of broadscale tree
clearing in Queensland.
Social issues
1. Socioeconomic issues related to native
vegetation management include:
the costs and benefits to society of different
management options for remnant native
vegetation management
identification of effective market and non-market
mechanisms or systems to assist landholders to
retain native vegetation on private land
off-site effects of clearing native vegetation and
on-farm effects of maintaining native vegetation.
2. Issues connected to values include:
the role and importance of non-commercial
values of remnant native vegetation in the
retention and management of vegetation
the range of valuesnon-commercial forest
values include intrinsic values, spiritual values,
ecological values, community values and
existence values.
Values must be considered if balanced decisions
about natural resource management are to be
made. Such considerations can be complex, as
values can sometimes be a source of contradiction
and dilemma. For example, there are dilemmas
between a nations history of equating clearing
with development, and valuing the ethos and
features of the bush as intrinsic to our national
identity. Other apparent contradictions arise when
there is a disjunction between conservation beliefs,
and pro-environmental behaviour, as some studies
suggest that pro-conservation attitudes were not
necessarily being translated into pro-conservation
behaviour on-farm (Goldney & Watson 1995).
3. Social issues and sustainability
As the topic of sustainability broadens, a greater
range of social issues emerges. As a result, the
focus changes from individual landholders actions
to the links between the local and the global, and
from forest tenure to forest management.
4. Community involvement issues
98
Policy and projects explore arrangements for

enabling community participation in natural
resource management generally, and in
vegetation management in particular. Such
arrangements, considered in consultation with
landholders, may include long- and short-term
leases, wardens, custodians, local and remote

management committees, conservation
covenants and heritage agreements.
As the value of participation is largely accepted,
a contemporary issue is not whether it should be
sought or encouraged, but how it should be
achieved.
Summits and strategy papers confirm that
sustainable resource management requires a
strengthening of partnerships between all levels
of government, communities and individuals.
An important issue centers on where support is
providedwhether to activities, or to the
structures that in turn would support activities.
5. Communication and partnerships
Communication is needed to address the poor
understanding of the value of remnant vegetation
among land managers.
A study of natural resource management
programs shows that partnerships are
considered crucial to success. Community and
government partnerships are developing through
community-based natural resource management
programs and through the development of
regional strategies.
6. Other issues
These concern the links between systems, for
example, those between remnant native
vegetation and agricultural production.
Economic issues
In this section, the economic analysis of both the
benefits and the negative consequences of tree
clearing is discussed as one mechanism for
assessing the preferences of society between
development and preservation options. Points in the
discussion are:
The analysis deals with both the direct and
indirect effects of clearing.
Past difficulties in such analyses include limited
data on production gains and poor
understanding of the longer-term consequences
of tree-clearing activities.
Net overall clearing benefits are outweighed in
some situations by the negative consequences
(e.g. salinity). Comparison of these costs
(marginal analysis) for different vegetation types
will have varying outcomes.
Costbenefit analysis is commonly used in
economic analysis for assessing preservation and
production choices in determining likely tradeoffs.
Historically, the emphasis has been on the social
benefits of production. Greater emphasis is now
placed on social costs in assessing land
degradation issues. These social costs cannot be
priced through normal markets, and a range of
specialised economic valuation tools are used.
Analysis of the on-farm benefits of tree clearing

in Queensland shows low returns from clearing
and development. Clearing may be conducted to
maintain or improve viability levels for individual
producers.
Public values of vegetation are discussed, with an

example of the willingness of Brisbane households
to pay for different preservation options.
Estimates are made of the indirect external

impacts of tree clearing such as carbon
emissions, although it is noted that more work is
needed to quantify carbon losses.
5.1 Rural social issues

A major provider of natural resources management
research funds prefaces its new Social and
Institutional Research Program information with the
statement that:
More than ten years experience in funding natural
resource R&D has demonstrated to the Corporation
that the most crucial barriers to improved use or
management of natural resources are social and
institutional factors and not a lack of scientific
knowledge. (LWRRDC 1999)
In the past, tree clearing was linked to productivity,

and it followed that discussions about minimising
tree clearing considered whether production would
be adversely affected, and what the follow-on
effects would be for surrounding communities. The
contemporary approach is to consider long term
maintenance, which means sustaining vegetation
while still sustaining agricultural industries and
rural communities. A number of issues arise, and
will be addressed in the following sections:
socioeconomic issues related to native vegetation
management; values; social issues and
sustainability; and community involvement issues.
5.1.1 Socioeconomic issues related

to native vegetation
management
Many important social issues relating to native
vegetation management were identified by a Land
and Water Resources Research and Development
Corporation (LWRRDC) project examining the
socioeconomic aspects of maintaining native
vegetation on agricultural land (Price 1995). The
project held a national workshop to consider the
socioeconomic, policy and related aspects of
managing native remnant vegetation, and the project
report records the background papers, discussions
and outcomes. The working group identified a
number of priority issues including:
The costs and benefits to society of different
management options for remnant native
vegetation management.
A major concern for landholders is how to link
preservation of native vegetation to agricultural
productivity, as there are differences in
understanding the costs and benefits There are few
economic models available that include native
vegetation management, although Charles Sturt

Universitys Johnstone Centre is making available
reports on the economics of conserving remnant
native vegetation management in the
MurrayDarling basin (Lockwood & Walpole 1999;
Walpole & Lockwood 1999).
Identification of effective market and non-market
mechanisms to assist landholders to retain native
vegetation on private land
The working group argues that landowners do not
always have the ability to take the long-term view
of economic benefit associated with native
vegetation management. They comment that there
is little analysis of the costs of clearance and the
establishment of farming systems, compared with
the profits and benefits of retention of native
vegetation. However, there are real costs in
managing native vegetation in terms of capital,
opportunity and recurrent costs. Many farmers see
neither economic incentives to retain remnant
native vegetation nor effective ways to protect and
manage bushland (Price 1995). In the same vein,
Hussey (1995) comments that cost for no
perceived return is the most common reason cited
for clearing or not managing native vegetation, and
is therefore an important social issue.
If the idea of cost and return is broadened
beyond a narrow financial, market-related
meaning, then Furze et al. (1996) provide further
support for the necessity to positively link
conservation effort and benefit to achieve results.
They analysed 50 conservation and development
case studies from around the world and they
comment that their analysis
Highlights the importance of explicitly linking
individual and local community benefit to
conservation programs. If conservationists stick to
the old paradigm, that development and
conservation are antithetical and natural resources
are for preservation, not use, then our review of
case studies holds out little hope for real
conservation gain. (Furze et al.1996)
The LWRRDC project (Price 1995) also reports on

issues not directly described as economic, such as
the clarification of the roles, rights and
responsibilities of stakeholder groups, and the
establishment of methods for collaboration between
tiers of government. Before such dynamics can be
worked out, it is important to identify scale
(national through to paddock) related to the
99
different tiers of government, rural industries,

community groups and landholders, to help identify
key stakeholders for each scale level.
At the biophysical and managerial level, the
LWRRDC working group also comments on the
disparity between management units such as
paddocks and stands of trees, and the scale on
which action is needed to retain native vegetation
for ecological purposes, such as ecosystems and
landscapes. Another issue arising in this category
is the poor integration of native vegetation
management in catchment and regional planning.
Off-site effects of clearing native vegetation and
on-farm effects of maintaining native vegetation
The social issues that arise in relation to native
vegetation management often involve a diversity of
interests in regional areas. For example, land
managers may argue that their viability depends on
their capacity to increase their areas of production.
However, such an increase can have negative
effects on other regional interests. Tree clearing in
one area can result in salinisation hundreds of
kilometres away on other properties and in regional
towns where buildings and roads become affected.
Increased soil and nutrient run-off, affecting
interests such as eco-tourism can also degrade
catchments.
Black et al. (1999), in their review of literature on
rural social issues, comment that Land continues
to be cleared for agriculture in Australia as farmers
respond to new opportunities without having to
calculate the effects beyond their own enterprises.
However, such information is being collected. A

recent report by Walpole and Lockwood (1999)
(table 5.1) lists the off-site costs of remnant native
vegetation clearance as:
cost to local government
cost to non-farm businesses
costs to urban households
cost of carbon dioxide release following clearing.
Values
A colloquium on Sustainable ForestsGlobal
Challenges and Local Solutions (Bouman & Brand
1997) was held to identify non-commercial forest
values. The consensus was that they include
intrinsic, spiritual, ecological, community and
existence values. As an outcome of the colloquium,
the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources now
recognises the importance of non-commercial
values and that methods are needed to incorporate
them when making decisions about forests.
In the retention and management of remnant native
vegetation, the role and importance of its noncommercial values are important issues. The
LWRRDC national working group (Price 1995)
identifies conflict over the intrinsic value of remnant
native vegetation. To some, the benefits of remnant
native vegetation are seen as symbolic rather than
substantive. There are dilemmas between a nations
history of equating clearing with development, and
valuing the ethos and features of the bush as
intrinsic to our national identify.
Table 5.1 Summary of estimated off-site costs of land degradation associated with tree clearing. Walpole and Lockwood (1999).
100
Type of
impact
Location
Cause of cost
Year of
estimate
Annual
cost
Reference
Soil erosion
Eppalock catchment,
Victoria
Maintenance costs for roads,

bridges and water supply
197475
$15 000
$30 000
Dunn & Gray (1978)
Stream
salinity
Loddon catchment,
Victoria
Damage to household equipment
1980
$4.40/ha
Greig & Devonshire

(1981)
Salinity
Victoria
Downstream water quality effects
1990
$7.3m
Dumsday & Oram (1990)
Salinity
Northern and
western Victoria
1984
$2.9m
Salinity Committee (1984)
Salinity
South Australia
1984
$7.2m
Peck et al. (1983)
Salinity
Bendigo, Ballarat and

Horsham area, Victoria
Damage to roads
1983
$1.1m
Salinity Committee (1984)
Salinity
Public utilities in
New South Wales
Damage to bridges and roads,

restoration of coastal sand drift
1983
$10.7m
Barter (1986)
Soil erosion
Coorong and district,

South Australia
Public infrastructure maintenance
1997
$0.4m
CDLAPSC (1997)
Salinity/
soil erosion
Queensland
Damage to urban water supplies,

drainage maintenance, silt
removal, dredging
1988
$31.3m
Russell et al. (1990)
Soil erosion
MurrayDarling basin
Repairs and maintenance

of infrastructure
1993
$8.2m
Oliver et al. (1996)
Salinity
Loddon and Campaspe

catchments, Victoria
1995
$0.67/
household
Lubulwa (1997)
Salinity
Loddon and Campaspe

Damage to non-farm business

equipment
1995
$26/
business
Whish-Wilson & Shafron

(1997)
Salinity
Loddon and Campaspe

Cost of reduced agricultural

production attributable to salinity
1995
$19.6m
Whish-Wilson & Shafron

(1997)
The working group also considers there are

dilemmas between valuing the bush for what it is,
and what its use can be, or seeing it as an obstacle
to other land uses. The failure to give remnant
native vegetation a book value as an asset with
potential to change value, or generate income or
expenditure, in the way that an area of cleared land
is given a book value for marketed properties, was
identified by the group as such an obstacle.
5.1.2 Social issues and sustainability

Framing the issues
The development of land for production was of
prime importance in earlier decades. Consequently,
decisions were made with the goal of getting
greatest use from the land, and that meant clearfelling to increase areas for production. As many
are aware, such practices have led to major
problems. Rural producers often point to the
requirement by governments of the time, that land
be cleared (as a condition of occupancy), and that
therefore the State must take some of the
responsibility for past rounds of what is now
construed as destruction. But what of continued
tree clearing? Decisions are still often made with
the intention of getting greatest use from the land,
despite the fact that the goal of production is now
being challenged by that of sustainability.
As Furze et al. (1996) comment, the focus on
sustainability has broadened the focus from the
individual landholders actions to the links between
the local and the global. They note that Local
Agenda 21from the Rio Summitsets out a
framework for local government, recognising the
need to mobilise resources at all levels from the
local to the global, forging a partnership between
local, regional, national and international
stakeholders. In their view, the linkages are a
critical focus.
No policy aimed to support local
conservation/development initiatives can work if it
ignores the steamrolling impact of the global
economy. International trade, the growth imperative,
global marketing and communications,
instantaneous pricing of commodities, bonds,
currencies as well as the power of central
governments all provide a context for local
processes. (Furze et al. 1996)
They agree with Scherl et al. (1994) who argue for

a pluralistic planning approach.
There is an urgent need to link local concerns, local
needs and local actions to the national and
international government structures designed to
conserve and manage the global environment.
(Scherl et al. 1994)
Ensuring sustainability is a complex juggling act, as

indicated in the findings from a five-year
consultation process to develop national guidelines
for rangeland management. The process began in
1994 with the release of the Rangelands Issues
Paper. Submissions were invited, with 182
responses received, and 30 workshops held around

Australia. The report, released in 1999, states
among its findings that
The challenge is to balance the diverse economic,
cultural and social needs of rangelands residents
and users with the need to maintain [the
rangelands] natural resources and conserve our
biological and cultural heritage. (ANZECC &
ARMCANZ, 1999)
Achieving sustainability involves keeping a number

of goals in mind, and in balance. In the past, the
economics were weighed to make decisions. Buchy
and Hoverman (1999) note that until recently forest
conflicts centred on issues of forest tenure, rather
than forest management. In the present, and for the
future, as one of the principles for rangeland
management states:
A wide range of values (social, cultural, economic,
aesthetic and ecological) needs to be considered in
making balanced decisions about the rangelands;
financial analysis alone is an inadequate tool for
this purpose. (ANZECC & ARMCANZ 1999)
The importance of aesthetic and other values was

recognized in the Regional Forest Agreement
process (Lennon 1998). The place given to
community involvement is an important part of this
broadening of the issue of vegetation management.
5.1.3 Community involvement issues

Population diversity in relation to
ecological mapping
Social dynamics will differ according to the
ecological, political and socioeconomic context.
The variety of ecological and social circumstances
and ownership has seen bodies such as the
International Union for Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources (IUCN) develop six
classifications of protected areas; from strict
wilderness reserve to managed resource protected
area. Additionally, UNESCO has proposed the
concept of a Biosphere Reservea protected area
with a core for conservation, a buffer zone for
research, recreation and tourism, and a transition
zone for agriculture, settlements and other human
uses of natural resources (Borrini-Feyeraband
1996). Such artificial divisions (artificial because
the lines often blur) give clues to the diversity of
populations in areas where natural resource
management issues become highly visible, and
such diversity is reflected in efforts toward
community involvement.
Community involvement in vegetation management
is a social issue that is gaining primary importance
in policy and practice. A number of research
projects have been exploring arrangements for
enabling community participation in natural
resource management generally, and in remnant
native vegetation management in particular. For
example, in the southern wheat belt, researchers
are investigating community involvement in
101
managing remnant native vegetation through

arrangements such as short- and long-term leases,
wardens, custodians, local and remote management
committees and conservation covenants and
heritage agreements (National Vegetation Initiative
1997). A Queensland government project is also
currently investigating appropriate arrangements
through workshops with regional communities.
Collaboration between communities and
government agencies is considered to be the way
forward (see AFFA 1999).
Treeby (1999) notes in a paper presented to the
1999 Tsukuba Asian Seminar on Agricultural
Education, that research is confirming that
participation is important to environmental
outcomes. He comments that, for instance, there
are indications that farms involved in broader
community and district approaches place a higher
priority on environmental outcomes than do
landholders who act in an individual capacity.
Participatory approaches are important to most
aspects of NRM, and some of these include
institutional issues such as the right mix of
decision-making powers and the integration of
disciplines; scales of decision making from the
national level to property and personal level, and
the integration of participation across scales.
There has been an increase in activity and interest
related to participatory approaches because
participation in natural resource management is
viewed by governments both as a means of
promoting greater democracy through community
ownership of natural resource issues, and as a
means of generating self help solutions to regional
problems. A contemporary issue is not whether
participation should be sought or encouraged, but
how participation should be achieved, as its value
is largely accepted.
There are a number of important imperatives
driving this increasing clarity of focus.
International policy forums, research and local
on-ground experience tell us that our natural
resource problems are escalating, and that our
stewardship efforts must increase.
Stewardship implies restoration, protection and
maintenance, and it is recognised that
stewardship cannot be left to one sector of
society alone. While
in the past, governments may have had primary
responsibility for resource management, the
activity currently recognised as necessary for
effective stewardship also involves landholders
and communities.
102
The recent Regional Australia Summit held on 2729

October 1999, confirmed the importance of those
imperatives as it demonstrated the increasing call by
citizens for involvement in decision making through
partnerships based on respect. It was agreed that
such partnerships would involve comprehensive
participation in decisions affecting regional

Australians and the broader Australian community.
The summit also recognised that the increasing scale
and scope of environmental challenges are beyond
the capacity of regional Australians alone to respond
to; sustainable resource management requires a
strengthening of partnerships between all levels of
government, communities and individuals. More
recently, the discussion paper emanating from
Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryAustralia entitled
Managing Natural Resources in Rural Australia for a
Sustainable Future is replete with references to
community, empowerment, and capacity
building as part of the emerging self help approach
to regionally-based natural resource management.
Lawrence (2000) has argued that to ensure that
real empowerment occurs, a project of sustainable
regional development should be enacted
throughout the nation. Permanent regional
structures with statutory powers are viewed by
Lawrence as being more effective in natural
resource management than the work of a plethora
of voluntary self help organisations. He advocates
policies that provide strong economic incentives to
regional citizens to embrace sustainable regional
development, and for the Federal Government to
provide leadership in establishing new forms of
regional organisations with clear environmental
responsibilities. Currently, the Federal Government
is viewed as having no overall vision for regional
communities, with their fate being left up to
uncertain and polarising market forcesand to the
knee-jerk reactions of populist politics (Gray &
Lawrence, forthcoming). The aim of the new
regional bodies would be to pursue the integration
of environmental management, social and
community development, and economic growth.
Statutory powers would help to ensure that
regional structures are not controlled by the Federal
and State governments (Dore & Woodhill 1999;
Gray & Lawrence, forthcoming).
Communication and involvement

Partnerships require mutual understanding of the
problems being addressed. An issue identified by
the LWRRDC working group (Price 1995) involves
making available appropriate information for
remnant native vegetation management. A number
of issues connect with this identified need for
communication.
There is a poor understanding of the value of
remnant vegetation among land managers and
advisers and inadequate communication of
knowledge about the status of remnant
vegetation. On the ground there is a paucity of
knowledge, skills and guidelines and a lack of
personnel for remnant vegetation management.
The range of stakeholders is also
underestimated.
Other issues are concerned with the links between

systems, for example:
between remnant native revegetation and
agricultural production. The appreciation of this
linkage is considered by one of the authors to be
the key to assessing ecological values
between remnants and the maintenance of biotic
diversity, and how communities are drawn into
understanding these linkages
Thomas (1995), in a background paper for the
workshop, writes that the first law of successful
natural resource management is where
community interests and private interests
coincide.
Changes in rural demographics

The demographic profile of farmers is changing
through ageing and structural adjustment. The
farming population of the future needs to be
identified so that the fact that sustainable
management can be effectively integrated with
production systems can be demonstrated and
communicated.
Partnerships and communication go some way to
involving rural communities in resource
management, including native vegetation
management. A benefit of such involvement is the
increase and exchange of knowledge, which is
important to enable informed, as opposed to
passive, vegetation management.
Many landholders and landcare groups are
embarking on projects without the benefit of
scientific particularly ecological, input, which is
probably undermining considerable amounts of
well-intentioned work. (Thomas 1995)
Goldney and Watson (1995) identify gaps in the

knowledge base such as What is the optimal area
and positioning of bushland on farms, in
catchments and across landscape to maximise
agricultural production? They also note a
disjunction between farmers pro-environmental
beliefs and their conservation action. They write:
Our survey suggests that, while farmers were indeed
responding positively to global environmental
concerns, including those that bear directly upon
the conservation of remnant bushland, they were
not translating those beliefs into action to
rehabilitate and conserve bushland on their farms,
and a significant proportion were open to further
clearing, should circumstance warrant.
(Goldney & Watson 1995)
Goldney also comments that in Carys analysis,

farmers beliefs about remnant bushland for
farmers are best described as symbolic and seem
largely unrelated to actual and intended
management behaviours. Their findings also
suggested that the establishment of more
substantive beliefs about remnant bushland, on
which behaviour would be based, might rely on
improved technical information about the
characteristics of remnant bushland and
management for its conservation. This refers back

to the emphasis placed on linking production and
conservation.
Participatory approaches are important to most
aspects of NRM, and some of these include
institutional issues such as the right mix of
decision-making powers and the integration of
disciplines; scales of decision making from national
level to property and personal level, and the
integration of participation across scales.
5.1.4 Partnerships
In their in-depth study of three cases (including
landcare), among other findings, Furze et al. (1996)
conclude that partnership is a crucial common
factor in the success of all three programs. Such a
finding accords with the call from the Regional
Australia Summit: explicitly, a partnership based on
respect. Their work also accords with the LWRRDC
national working group study contributions that
highlight the need for a greater understanding of
the links between conservation of native vegetation
and agricultural production.
Community and government partnerships have
been developing through programs such as
landcare and bushcare, and monitoring programs
such as Waterwatch, Pasture Watch, Saltwatch and
Grass Care. Other consultation mechanisms include
social impact assessment through the Regional
Forest Agreement process and the Water Allocation
Management Plans.
Consultation is also taking place through the
development of regional strategies. Property
management planning is another forum for
developing partnerships between government and
landholders. Such developments are based on the
widespread realisation that sustainable production
is dependent on protection of our environment.
As regional communities become more diverse,
production becomes a part of broader regional
activities. Sustaining the regions depends on
maintaining the diversity of communities, just as
sustaining the environment depends on maintaining
the diversity of its biology and ecology. The focus is
now on sustainable communities, with production a
significant part of community activity, but with
other interests also needing to be addressed (Dore
& Woodhill 1998; Lawrence 1998).
5.2 An economic analysis of

broadscale tree clearing in
Queensland
5.2.1 Introduction
Broadscale tree clearing in Queensland has been
associated with large increases in agricultural
production, particularly in the beef and grain
industries. However, clearing has also been
associated with some negative consequences,
103
including the loss of biodiversity, and in some

cases, indirect impacts such as salinity and land
degradation (Conacher & Conacher 1995; Gretton &
Salma 1996). In the cases where environmental
damage leads to production losses, there is little
disagreement about the need for remedial action,
but there is wider disagreement about who should
bear the costs of such action. There are other cases
where there are direct trade-offs between
production and environmental factors, and often
more substantial disagreements about resource use.
In economic terms, the major reason why

disagreements about tree clearing arise is that the
costs and benefits arising from vegetation clearing
fall unevenly across different groups in society. The
production benefits that result from clearing and
development are largely commercial benefits that
accrue directly to landholders. In making choices to
clear vegetation, landholders balance these benefits
against the financial costs that they will incur, as
well as their own perceptions about other costs
such as salinity risks and biodiversity loss.
An economic framework offers one mechanism for

assessing the preferences of society between
development and preservation options. In this
approach, the costs and benefits of different
options are assessed in monetary terms. These
costs and benefits can be classified into three broad
groups. The first relate to the direct uses attached
to production and conservation options. In relation
to tree-clearing activities, these are mainly
associated with commercial benefits from the
increased production of grain, beef and wool.
Many of the potential losses that result from

clearing and development are borne by other
groups in society. If clearing results in indirect
losses, such as land degradation and salinity, these
costs tend to be borne by future generations of
landholders and those on downstream or
neighbouring properties. If clearing results in
biodiversity loss, the impacts will tend to be borne
by the wider State and national community who
place a value on preserving such factors. If clearing
results in increased levels of greenhouse gas
emissions, these impacts will have global effects.
The second broad group is associated with the

indirect effects that might be associated with
clearing activities. Examples of these might be
potential losses from increased risks of salinity,
land degradation and greenhouse gas emissions. In
some cases there may also be benefits from
reduced erosion or land degradation impacts as a
consequence of development activities. The third
group are the preferences that groups in society
might hold for particular options, independent of
whether they bear any direct or indirect effects.
These are the preferences that people might hold
for protecting biodiversity, and for protecting the
livelihood and ethos of people in rural regions, even
if they have no direct association. Such
preservation values are termed non-use values.
It has been difficult in the past to conduct a full
economic appraisal of tree-clearing activities. This
is because of limited data about production gains, a
poor understanding of the longer term
consequences of clearing, and almost no
information about the protection values that the
wider community might hold for vegetation
preservation and/or for rural communities. The lack
of information about values that the wider
community might hold for protecting vegetation
(and biodiversity more generally) in regional areas
of Australia is a particular deficiency.
There is often confusion about the economic
analysis of natural resource management issues.
This is because an economic analysis is more
inclusive than one focusing on commercial viability.
As well as assessing the direct uses (commercial
benefits and costs), an economic analysis will
include the various spillover effects that are
represented by the indirect and non-use costs
and benefits.
104
Vegetation clearing activities that impose costs on

wider communities than the groups making the
clearing decision are examples of what economists
term spillover effects, or externalities. In making the
decision to clear vegetation, landholders do not
always take into account the wishes of the broader
community. In a sense, the problem is one of a
missing market. Landholders receive signals from
society, in the form of prices and income, to
produce more beef and wool, and so they clear
land to meet those needs, but do not receive
corresponding financial signals about the wishes of
society to preserve biodiversity and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. Relying on commercial
production benefits to allocate natural resources is
not always efficient because it does not account for
the broader wishes of society.
In recent decades, there has been a large shift in
community values associated with vegetation
clearing. There is widespread knowledge now of
many of the indirect effects of clearing on land
quality and greenhouse gas emissions. There are
increasing community values for vegetation
protection, partly because of rising income and
diminished levels of remnant vegetation (Hone,
Edwards & Fraser 1999). There is also awareness
by the community of subsequent impacts of
clearing on ecosystem functioning and other biota.
These impacts have meant that there is increasing
divergence between the commercial gains from
clearing and the associated community losses
represented by indirect and non-use values.
Governments generally have a role in correcting
externality problems, and there is increasing
recognition of externality issues in natural resource
management in Australia. There are a variety of
correction mechanisms available (AFFA 1999),

largely directed towards making those responsible
for resource use consider the wishes of a more
encompassing group in society. A first step is to
quantify the differences that might exist between
commercial gains and other impacts on wider
groups in society. To develop some understanding of
how the benefits and costs relating to tree clearing
in Queensland may be viewed in economic terms, a
number of different concepts are discussed below.
Governments have traditionally acted to balance

the wishes of society in relation to both production
and preservation issues. The prime example of this
role is where the Government has reserved some
land from production areas in the form of National
Parks. The complexity and diversity of natural
resource management issues means that
governments are involved on a number of fronts to
establish where trade-offs might occur and to set
the framework for production goals to be pursued.
5.2.2 Marginal costs and benefits

of clearing
The production benefits that can be gained from

clearing native vegetation are rarely uniform. The
best quality agricultural land, with high production
benefits per hectare, tends to be cleared first. As
this land becomes scarcer, attention turns to lower
quality land where some commercial benefits are
still available from clearing. This pattern can be
seen in Queensland, where clearing activities have
moved from high rainfall and fertile soil areas,
westwards into the scrub and then to the woodland
vegetation types. Falling real costs of development,
as well as new production techniques (e.g.
introduced pastures) have also aided this process.
While many clearing activities have provided net

overall benefits to Australia, there are some
situations where the increased production and
other benefits of clearing may be outweighed by the
negative consequences. There are examples in
Australia (Walpole & Lockwood 1999), where
clearing has continued past the point where the
benefits from increased production have been
below the subsequent environmental costs and
long-term production losses. In some cases, such
as in dry-land salinity areas, it has occurred
because of limited knowledge about the long-term
and indirect effects of clearing actions. In other
cases, such as in endangered vegetation
communities, it occurs because landholders
respond to the commercial pressures for increased
production and do not receive signals about the
wider communitys wishes for biodiversity
protection.
The preservation values per hectare of native

vegetation are also rarely uniform. People in society
generally place most importance on unique and/or
endangered species and ecosystems (Rolfe, Blamey
& Bennett 2000). As a species or ecosystem moves
from plentiful and widespread towards being
restricted and endangered, the preservation values
attached to an average unit or hectare are likely to
rise substantially.
Table 5.2 Social costs and benefits of tree clearing.

Impacts
Benefits
Costs
Direct, medium term
Income from increase in carrying capacity, animal

performance OR Increase in land values as a result of
the net increase in annual income
Cost of clearing trees, cost of pasture establishment,

maintenance of cleared land, extra investment in
livestock, extra investment in fencing, water, yards,
extra running costs such as labour and repairs
Indirect, longer term
Savings in costs/increased output from possible reduction Increase in costs/decrease in output from reduced tree
in grazing pressure on rest of property
cover (e.g. shade, shelter, nutrient recycling)
Property level
Savings in costs/increased output from improved access

for mustering
Increase in costs/decrease in output from on-property

salinity and erosion
Enhanced aesthetic value of cleared landscape
Pastoralists own value for biodiversity loss

Diminished aesthetic value because of reduction
in tree cover
External impacts
Land quality
Savings in costs/increased income from possible

reduction in land degradation on some properties
Cost of greenhouse gases
Increase in costs/decrease in output from off-property

salinity, erosion
Reduction in economic welfare from increase in
greenhouse gas emissions
Biodiversity
Reduction in economic welfare from biodiversity loss
Aesthetics
Non-pastoralists enhanced aesthetic value of

cleared landscape
Rural communities
Increase in welfare of rural communities from

more profitable agricultural sector
Non-pastoralists diminished aesthetic value because

of reduction in tree cover
Source: ABARE (1995); Rolfe, Bennett & Blamey (2000).
105
These changes in both the marginal benefits and

costs of vegetation clearing provide a powerful
explanation of development history in Queensland.
When European settlement commenced and most
vegetation types were abundant, preservation
values per hectare would have been low, and
potential production benefits high. With the values
of (European) society at the time emphasising the
social objectives of closer settlement and
development, it was appropriate for the government
to promote development outcomes. The arguments
about resources in the first 100 years of settlement
tended to be about competing uses (e.g. forestry or
agriculture), rather than development versus
protection.
As widespread clearing has occurred, particularly
over the last 50 years, governments have moved to
emphasis conservation and protection goals as well
as development ones. This has been partly because
of rising concerns in the community about
biodiversity protection. It is also because, as clearing
in vegetation communities extends towards the last
remaining units, the extra gains in production tend
to fall below the values for preserving those
vegetation communities. As a vegetation community
becomes more extensively cleared, the additions to
total production tend to fall (because the better
quality land tends to be cleared first), while the
preservation values tend to rise (reflecting the
limited amount of biodiversity remaining).
When the costs and benefits of clearing are
considered for each additional area of a vegetation
type (marginal analysis), the overall outcome is
likely to vary. At low levels of development, the
production benefits from clearing are likely to
outweigh other costs, such as biodiversity losses.
At some more intensive level of development, the
additional production benefits from clearing may be
outweighed by the associated losses, particularly in
an affluent country such as Australia where values
for protecting biodiversity tend to be high. The
policy shifts at the Commonwealth Government and
State Government levels over the past 20 years
reflect this logical outcome.
5.2.3 Assessing the costs and

benefits of clearing options
The diversity of vegetation types and production
opportunities means that the balance between
production and preservation goals might vary
widely across different vegetation communities and
choices. For example, society may benefit from
having high clearing rates in areas that have low
preservation values and high production values.
This may help to explain past high clearing rates in
agricultural areas. The maximum benefits to society
might come from clearing vegetation types for high
value uses (such as new roads or other
infrastructure developments) but preserving them
against other development opportunities (such as
low value agricultural development).
To minimise the decision costs (transaction costs)
involved in establishing where the trade-offs should
apply in each case, it is generally preferable to
group the potential trade-off choices into easily
comprehensible and enforceable rules. Biologists
and ecologists advise on how risks of biodiversity
loss may be conveniently related to remnant
vegetation as a function of area, extent of clearing
and other factors. This advice may be codified into
guidelines for use by landholders, communities and
governments to help determine where the
appropriate trade-offs between production and
protection exist.
The standard tool that economists use for assessing
preservation and production choices is costbenefit
analysis (CBA). This technique operates by
assessing how people in society value the benefits
and costs that flow from a particular resource-use
alternative. If the benefits outweigh the costs, the
project is assumed to be worthwhile or desirable
(economic), and vice versa. In this way, economists
can provide advice to decision makers in society
about how the preferences of society sum-up over a
particular issue. While the technique relies on some
particular assumptions (notably accepting the
current distribution of income in society), it provides
a powerful mechanism of assessing the weight of
preferences for particular resource-use alternatives.
Table 5.3 Individual business summaries by region. Source: DPI (forthcoming).
Business assets (land, stock and equipment)
Central
Queensland
brigalow
Central west
Mitchell grass
Maranoa
brigalow
$2 292 206
$3 628 100
$2 237 700
$2 056 200
Business liabilities
$436 000
$544 215
$378 432
$185 000
Cattle sales
$313 770
$342 261
$235 633
$149 000
$87 487
$50 966
$49 309
$15 265
Total gross margin
$226 283
$291 295
$186 324
$133 843
Fixed costs (including depreciation)
Variable costs
106
Northern
black
speargrass
$117 000
$114 600
$85 380
$53 250
Unpaid family labour
$40 000
$40 000
$40 000
$40 000
Return to total capital
$69 283
$136 695
$60 944
$40 593
Return on total capital
3.02%
3.77%
2.72%
1.97%
13%
9%
10%
7%
Asset turnover ratio
Pastoralists generally respond to direct-use benefits

when they clear trees, in the expectation that the
returns from increased carrying capacity will
outweigh the cost of clearing, pasture development
and subsequent maintenance. Pastoralists might
also factor in their personal preferences for items
such as biodiversity conservation, the aesthetics of
tree cover, and the risks of longer-term impacts
such as salinity. However, there are a range of costs
and benefits that may not be considered by
pastoralists, including community values for
biodiversity, indirect effects on greenhouse gas
emissions, and off-farm costs of land degradation.
A summary of the costs and benefits of tree
clearing is presented in table 5.2.
In the absence of government intervention, tree
clearing occurs where landholders balance the
benefits and costs at the property level and
perceive that higher returns are available from
pursuing clearing options8. Some landholders may
consider only the benefits and costs of development
in the short term, while others may be inclined to
factor in a variety of medium to longer term
considerations that they consider important. This
means that among landholders, there will be some
diversity in the balance that they strike between
production and preservation alternatives.
The external impacts of tree clearing activities can
be both positive and negative. In the past,
governments have emphasised the social benefits of
increased production and have encouraged tree
clearing through taxation incentives, lease
conditions and other mechanisms. This has
occurred in part because there has been little
knowledge about some of the external and indirect
costs of clearing (such as salinity and greenhouse
gas emissions),and because when native vegetation
was in abundance, it is likely that the marginal
social benefits from further clearing outweighed the
marginal social costs.
Social benefits are likely to be increased where
tree-clearing and production increases help to
address land degradation issues and enhance the
viability of rural communities. Social losses are
likely to result when tree clearing increases land
degradation, increases greenhouse gas emissions,
or reduces biodiversity.
The categorisation of costs and benefits outlined in
table 5.2 provides one framework for assessing
where trade-offs between production and
preservation should be made at a regional or
property level. In summary, the issue to be
Cattle numbers vs rate of return

8
6
4
Rate of return
There are a large number of factors that need to be

considered in a complete CBA approach. This is
because an economic analysis of a resource use
option is much broader than a corresponding
financial summary. While estimates of potential
production benefits can usually be gained from
market data, indirect and non-use costs and
benefits have to be estimated in different ways.
2
0
-2
1995
1996
1997
-4
-6
Years
<300 cattle
300550 cattle
5501000 cattle
10002800 cattle
28005500 cattle
>5500 cattle
Figure 5.1 Rates of return by establishment herd size in

Queensland. Source: ABARE (1998, 1999).
determined is whether the net returns from tree

clearing at the property level (the items in the first
half of the table) are outweighed by the net external
impacts (the items in the second half of the table).
The external (or off-farm) impacts of tree clearing
are not priced in normal markets, in contrast to the
physical outcomes such as increased supplies of
beef or grain. A range of specialised economic
valuation techniques are available to estimate what
value may be placed on external impacts, (Sinden
1994). To assess the value of indirect impacts such
as salinisation and greenhouse gas emissions, cost
pricing and other techniques are available. For
example, Walpole and Lockwood (1999) summarise
a list of Australian studies that estimate off-site
costs of land degradation associated with tree
clearing. The only Queensland example is from
Russell et al. (1990), who estimate that the annual
cost of degradation in damage to urban water
supplies, drainage maintenance, silt removal and
dredging costs is $31.3 million.
To assess the non-use values associated with the
existence and protection of biodiversity, and the
stated preference of rural communities, techniques
such as contingent valuation and choice modelling
need to be employed. These have not been widely
applied in Australia, and there has been some
controversy about the use of the contingent
valuation method (Bennett & Carter 1993). There are
few applications of non-market valuation techniques
associated with vegetation protection issues in
Australia, as the following summary illustrates.
Bennett (1984) estimated, with the use of the
Contingent Valuation Method (CVM), that the
average value per adult in Canberra for preserving
a particular woodland area in the Australian
107
Capital Territory was $20. Hundloe et al. (1990)

used CVM to report that the environmental benefits
of banning logging on Fraser Island were in excess
of $5 billion. The Resource Assessment Commission
(1992) used CVM to estimate that in Victoria, New
South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory,
households were willing to pay $43.50 to preserve
the south-east forests (Bennett & Carter 1993).
Windle and Cramb (1993) used CVM to estimate
values for preserving bushland in Brisbane, and
concluded that these were positive.
More recently, Lockwood and Walpole (1999) have
reported on a benefitcost analysis of remnant
native vegetation conservation in north-east
Victoria and the Murray catchment in southern
New South Wales. The costs of conservation
options were first assessed in terms of the
economic costs to landholders in terms of
production foregone and other factors. This was
then compared with the benefits of conservation
options, which included impacts on mitigating
dryland salinity, reducing greenhouse gas
emissions, and the protection values held by the
State populations. These values, estimated using
the Choice Modelling technique, were estimated at
$60.7 million for north-east Victoria, and
$75.6 million in the Murray catchment.
That study indicated that there were 113 313 ha of
remnant vegetation remaining on private lands in
north-east Victoria and 203 429 ha in the New
South Wales Murray catchment. The protection
values on a per hectare basis are thus $535/ha in
the Victorian area, and $372/ha in the New South
Wales Murray catchment. The study concluded that
the benefits of conservation outweighed the
opportunity costs, and that governments could
spend up to $29.8 million in north-east Victoria and
$40.5 million in the Murray catchment on vegetation
protection to maximise community values.
5.2.4 Net on-farm benefits from tree

clearing in Queensland
The draft Integrated Beef Industry Strategies (IBIS)
report (DPI, forthcoming), provides a summary
of financial returns and productivity indicators of
beef enterprises in four major regions (Tables 5.3
and 5.4).
Table 5.4 Productivity Performance Indicators. Source: DPI
(forthcoming).
Performance Northern
Central
Central
indicator
black Queensland
west
spearbrigalow
Mitchell
grass
grass
108
Maranoa
brigalow
Beef sold
(kg/beast area)
106
132
86
142
Cost/kg
beef ($)
0.77
0.64
0.81
0.98
Gross margin
($/ha)
7.54
40.06
10.34
38.24
Gross margins represent the difference between

gross income and variable costs. They are
traditionally used as an economic indicator to
compare enterprises because they minimise
comparative differences. The data in table 5.4
shows that the annual gross margins associated
with beef production in brigalow country (which
has largely been cleared and developed) are much
higher than in speargrass or Mitchell grass country
(which is largely in its original state).
In Queensland, the commercial production benefits
available from tree clearing vary widely according
to the vegetation type and production
opportunities. After the initial clearing, there is a
spike in pasture production, followed by declines
caused by falling soil fertility and competition from
regrowth. ABARE (1995) quotes Burrows (1990) as
indicating that the removal of trees can increase
initial pasture production 27 times. Treatment of
regrowth can be used to maintain pasture
production above the preclearing levels.
Burrows (1999) reports that the net present value
of clearing in the poplar box woodlands of central
Queensland ranges from $40$64/ha, according to
different timber treatments and allowing for a 20%
retention rate. In the Desert Uplands bioregion
further to the west, Resource Consulting Services
(RCS 1999) report from two case studies that the
net present value of developing ironbark and wattle
country is $12.34/ha, and $28.31/ha for ironbark
and box country.
In each of these cases, overhead expenses, unpaid
family labour and a return on capital invested in
land and equipment have not been included in the
estimation of net returns per hectare. At the
property level, where landholders may be
considering additional clearing, this exclusion may
be commonplace. However, when these additional
costs are included to develop an overall picture of
net returns per hectare, the returns are likely to be
much lower. This is because these additional costs
are a substantial proportion of inputs (see table 5.3).
Net property returns are analysed in Rolfe and
Donaghy (2000), who report that for many beef
properties across Queensland, net returns are very
low or negative. This is shown in figure 5.1, where
the rates of return (incorporating overhead costs,
unpaid family labour and return on capital
invested) are reported by herd size over time. The
results show increases in the rates of return over
time (as seasons and market conditions improve),
but that, on average, enterprises running less than
1000 head do not meet long-term viability
standards. Approximately two-thirds of specialist
beef producers have less than 1000 head of cattle
(see table 5.5).
Table 5.5 Queensland specialist beef producers by herd size.

Source: ABARE (1998, 1999).
Herd size
Number of
producers in
199798
Number of
producers in
199899
<300
2 415
2 032
300550
1 154
1 304
5501000
787
804
10002800
1 131
1 262
28005500
429
438
>5500
250
325
This summary shows that there are two important

reasons why beef producers are likely to be
involved in tree-clearing activities. The first is that
if only operating costs and returns are considered,
the returns from clearing and pasture development
are attractive. If all costs and inputs are considered,
the returns from clearing and development are
lower. The difference between gross margins and
total returns suggests that landholders will often
find it profitable to develop an additional paddock
(on an ongoing incremental basis), but not
necessarily attractive to develop an entire property
immediately.
The second reason why clearing activities may be
important to landholders is that they may be trying
to maintain or improve viability levels. Given the
substantial number of beef enterprises that fall
below long-term viability criteria (Rolfe & Donaghy
2000), this may be a very important consideration
for individual producers. However, for a number of
smaller producers, it is very unlikely that clearing
and development options on virgin vegetation areas
will be enough to redress viability issues.
5.2.5 Indirect external impacts from

tree clearing
There are several indirect impacts from tree
clearing that might be considered in a CBA
framework, such as those that reduce land
degradation. Examples of positive outcomes might
be clearing and pasture development measures that
reduce soil erosion, and that in some cases,
address vegetation thickening and soil degradation
impacts. ABARE (1999) report that 63% of beef
producers surveyed in Queensland have declining
pasture productivity as a result of vegetation
thickening. This thickening is a widespread
phenomenon in Queensland, and in Australia more
generally, due to grazing pressure and suppressed
fire management since European settlement
(Flannery 1994; Burrows et al. 1997). The wider
community may view favourably measures that
restore pre-European landscapes and production,
although as Burrows (1999) notes, there is some
debate about whether such clearing is restoration
or development.
Clearing might also lead to land degradation

impacts, and thus invoke overall costs. In some
cases, such as soil erosion, it is often not the initial
clearing that is directly responsible, but the
subsequent stocking pressures and management
activities. In other cases, such as impacts relating
to dryland salinity, clearing is directly associated
with indirect losses.
The impacts of many indirect effects of land
clearing, such as dryland salinity, have been
generally poorly anticipated in Australia by
landholders, scientists and regulators. There is
increasing evidence that dryland salinity problems
associated with tree clearing may be more
substantial in Queensland than had previously been
considered (Williams et al. 1997; CSIRO 1999),
although areas affected by salinity remain at low
levels compared with those in States such as
Western Australia (Gretton & Salma 1996). This
suggests that for some clearing options, the risks of
salinity impacts will need to be considered carefully
in any CBA.
One of the indirect impacts of tree clearing is the
subsequent release of greenhouse gases, principally
carbon in the form of carbon dioxide9. The major
release is likely to be from the burning and rotting
of above-ground vegetation once it has been
cleared. Other releases are likely to come from the
rotting and burning of below-ground biomass (e.g.
roots), and from changes in the organic carbon
levels in soils. At the same time, there may be
offsetting carbon sequestration effects, largely
through carbon taken up in increased pasture
levels, and in some cases, improvements in soil
carbon levels.
The overall loss of carbon from clearing activities is
difficult to quantify for a number of reasons
(Burrows et al. 1997). The amount of biomass
varies across sites according to vegetation type, soil
type and climatic influences. The measurement of
carbon levels is imprecise because the development
of the appropriate modelling relationships is in its
early stages and there is a limited amount of data
available. These difficulties are more pronounced for
below-ground biomass and soil carbon levels
compared with those for above-ground biomass.
Carbon releases from different sources also occur at
varying rates, and both release and sequestration
patterns are confounded with seasonal fluxes. The
estimation of the actual areas of each vegetation
type is also imprecise, making it difficult to
extrapolate site data to aggregate amounts.
Given these uncertainties, some broad estimates of
the amount of carbon that might be released from
tree clearing in some areas can be made. Burrows
et al. (1997) report that for the grazed woodlands
of northern Queensland, the average basal area of
+
0.95)m2/ha. They also
all woody plants is 9.62 (
report that the mean above-ground biomass of
109
eucalyptus trees (the dominant genus type in these

woodland regions) is 4235 kg of matter per m2 of
basal area, or approximately 40.74 tonnes/ha10. At
approximately 46% carbon, the total mass of
above-ground carbon is 18.7 tonnes/ha.
To this estimate for above-ground carbon must be
added the below-ground stock (approximately 30%
of above-ground stocks to a one metre depth) and
soil carbon levels. (Burrows, W. H. 2000, pers.
comm., 25 April) suggests that net below-ground
and soil carbon stocks remain relatively unchanged
after tree clearing because below-ground biomass
decays tend to be balanced by pasture and soil
carbon increases. If this is the case, then the net
carbon loss from tree clearing in the northern
eucalypt woodlands can be estimated at the aboveground biomass of 18.7 tonnes per hectare. While
this estimate, is approximate it will give some idea
of the external losses associated with this factor of
tree clearing.
Trade in carbon offsets is an emerging market, with
many initial trades occurring in the region of
around $10 US/tonne of carbon. Rolfe (1998)
summarises a number of international forestry
carbon offset programs as costing between $1.50
and $12.50 Australian11. Within that range, the
indirect losses associated with greenhouse gas
emissions from tree clearing in woodland regions
appear to lie between $28 and $233 per hectare.
Lockwood and Walpole (1999) selected $10/tonne
of carbon dioxide as an appropriate benchmark,
which converts to approximately $2.70/tonne of
carbon. At this price, the value of the loss in
greenhouse gas emissions from tree clearing in the
northern eucalypt woodlands is approximately
$50.50/ha.
More work is needed to quantify carbon losses
from tree clearing at the property level and to
estimate appropriate price levels.
5.2.6 Non-use values

The other category of external impacts to consider
is public values for biodiversity protection and the
health of rural communities. Data on the value of
these impacts in Queensland is limited, but Rolfe,
Bennett and Blamey (2000) report some exploratory
estimates within an economic analysis of tree
clearing in the Desert Uplands bioregion of centralwestern Queensland.
In that study, the Choice Modelling Technique was
used to estimate the preservation values that
households in Brisbane had for protecting both
environmental factors and the livelihood of people
in rural communities. The results can be illustrated
in a number of different options for increasing
vegetation protection, as shown in table 5.6. This
indicates how much Brisbane households are
willing to pay for further restrictions on tree
clearing with different policy outcomes.
The results indicate that there are substantial
preservation values associated with options giving
greater protection to biodiversity in the Desert
Uplands region. The values are sensitive to impacts
on regional income and job losses, but are not
completely negated by these effects unless they are
very high (as in option E). The preservation values
do not correlate linearly with increases in
protection levels, but are weighted heavily towards
some increase in protection levels above the
current standard, and towards the protection of
endangered species.
Rolfe, Bennett and Blamey (2000) compared the
non-use protection values with the production
opportunities in the Desert Uplands to conclude
that for slight to modest increases in vegetation
protection, the values of biodiversity protection
would outweigh both subsequent social impacts
and potential production losses. For more
substantial levels of protection, the latter tended to
outweigh the former. However, the value of possible
greenhouse gas emissions may still make many
tree-clearing activities in the region uneconomic
from the viewpoint of society as a whole.
Table 5.6 The amount that Brisbane householders are willing to pay for different preservation options.
Source: Rolfe, Bennett & Blamey (2000).
Attribute
110
Change from
current trends
Change from
current trends
Change from
current trends
Change from
current trends
Change from
current trends
Option E
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Jobs lost in the region
10
30
50
50
180
Regional income lost
$5 million
$10 million
$5 million
$10 million
$10 million
Additional species
preserved in area
10
Additional % of
non-threatened
species preserved
30%
45%
10%
10%
10%
Additional area of unique

ecosystems preserved
10%
20%
30%
30%
30%
Amount
$76
$88
$80
$74.50
$0
5.2.7 Measures to reduce treeclearing activities

The evidence from the costbenefit approach
outlined is that there are likely to be some
situations where tree-clearing activities are not
economic from a social perspective. However, they
may still be commercially attractive to the
landholder because landholders do not receive
signals about the indirect and non-use impacts
of clearing decisions. In the presence of these
externalities, policy makers have firstly to consider
whether the costs of those externalities outweigh
the production benefits, and secondly, whether it is
economic to change the situation.
should be devolved to regional and catchment

areas, and that partnerships should be built
between all relevant parties to improve
management. There is an increasing role for social
scientists (e.g. economists, sociologists and regional
planners) in identifying and in negotiating
agreement between stakeholders about resource
management issues.
It is not always worthwhile to correct externalities

because of the administrative and transaction costs
involved, and the difficulties in achieving balanced
outcomes. For this reason, policy makers are
sensitive to the size of remedial costs, and to the
search for the most efficient solutions to reduce
social losses. It is rare that a solution satisfies every
affected group in society, and more likely that a
solution (or group of solutions) will address only the
major losses caused by an externality. In applying a
potential correction measure, the policy maker has
to determine whether the benefits of the correction
outweigh the costs of the corrective measure.
There are a number of corrective measures that may
be employed to address externalities caused by
tree-clearing activities. Many of these have been
listed or reviewed by AFFA (1999). For example,
regulatory measures have advantages in that they
are compulsory, but may be inflexible, have high
compliance costs, and impose losses on some
groups. Improvements in knowledge can help
landholders to reduce short-term behaviour that
incurs long-term production losses, but may offer
little incentive to reduce public losses. Incentive
payments, in the form of biodiversity credits,
stewardship payments or carbon offsets may offer
some flexibility in pursuing protection options, but
may be difficult to administer and audit.
The process of developing solutions to externality
problems can also be evaluated in economic
outcomes. Solutions that have low compliance
costs and are accepted by all affected groups tend
to minimise the transaction costs involved in
moving to different resource allocation rules.
Processes that give stakeholders and the
community some role in resource allocation may
appear expensive and difficult to develop, but
ultimately reduce subsequent transaction costs.
The involvement of stakeholder groups in regional
planning processes and negotiated settlements in
natural resource management often generates
substantial economic benefits in terms of reduced
transaction and compliance costs. Among the
recommendations of AFFA (1999), are that
authority relating to natural resource management
111
112
return to contents
Planning and monitoring native vegetation management
Contributors
Vegetation management planning
Richard Johnson, Environmental Protection Agency
Monitoring
Peter Johnston, Department of Primary Industries
Andrew Franks, Department of Natural Resources
Anne Kelly, Department of Natural Resources
Teresa Eyre, Department of Natural Resources
Geoffrey Smith, Department of Natural Resources
113
Summary
Planning is the process by which individuals or
groups determine outcomes and strategies. Early
planning theory advocates a centralised
approach in which it is instigated by government
agencies. More recent approaches advocate a
political process of bargaining and negotiating
among competing interests.
Planning activities occur in a range of contexts
(e.g. catchment or rangelands), and in association
with other planning activities. Collectively, these
make up planning systems. The ability of a
system to achieve sustainability and equity
depends on the collective understanding of natural
resource management problems, institutional
support for stakeholders in negotiating the issues,
and capacity of these groups to participate in
inherently political processes.
Regional approaches to planning are suitable for
dealing with problems of environmental
degradation, conservation and sustainability. In
particular, planning at this level can use the
dynamic approach of landscape ecology, and its
description of flows in ecosystems.
Regional ecosystems, which can act as a
surrogate for biodiversity, offer a system on
which to base biodiversity planning approaches
to sustainable vegetation management.
Bioregional planning systems should include
ecological links that reflect natural processes.
Problems identified in a review of current
regional planning methods were: difficulty of
integrating information; different approaches to,
and practicalities of, problems; failure of
technical information to meet decision-making
needs; inability to achieve full public
participation; and lack of integration in policy
and legislation.
114
There are many opportunities for integrated

planning and community participation in
effective regional planning. However, a number
of principles and guidelines are recommended
including: ensuring that all elements are adaptive
and adequate, and are applied in a way that is
sustainable, equitable, accountable, integrated,
effective and efficient.
Regional vegetation management plans (RVMPs)
may provide opportunities to plan for sustainable
native vegetation management and integration
with other natural resource management
initiatives. RVMPs may be guided by the
principles of planning systems theory to
contribute to the development of an improved
regional planning system.
Property planning is used by landholders to
achieve a variety of outcomes. It can be used to
secure the long-term viability of a property and
to maintain ecosystem health, integrated pest
management and production values. Applications
for tree-clearing permits must be accompanied
by a property management plan.
Property planning should consider the retention
of remnant vegetation for biodiversity and
production. Recommendations for the amount of
vegetation to be retained will depend on the
planned land use. Retained areas can be in the
form of strips and clumps.
Monitoring and modification of management
strategies help ensure that planning systems
remain robust. Monitoring requires effective
indicators of sustainability, and can be
conducted at various levels for a variety of
purposes. There are a number of monitoring
tools and resources available. It is essential that
the objectives of any monitoring program be
clearly defined at the outset.
6.1 Vegetation management

planning
Unprecedented population pressure and the
demands of society are increasing the degradation
of resources and threatening ecosystem stability
and resilience. The role of integrated planning to
meet these pressures has been highlighted by the
Commission on Sustainable Development (ad hoc
Working Group on Integrated Planning and
Management of Land Resources and Agriculture
2000). Traditional planning theory has evolved from
rational approaches towards communicative and
adaptive forms of planning. Dale and Cowell (1999)
suggest that emerging landscape ecology concepts
are based on systematic and adaptive perspectives,
and that this shift in theoretical perspective, if
combined with the recent emphasis on
sustainability concepts, can refocus planning for
sustainability. Vegetation management is integral to
land use and environmental change. This review
has highlighted the functional role of vegetation in
the landscape. Planning has frequently been used
in the past to manage native vegetation sustainably,
both formally (e.g. Tree Management Plans under
the Land Act 1994 (Qld)), and less formally (e.g.
landholder property planning). In this section, the
challenges and opportunities of planning for
sustainable native vegetation management at a
number of levels in Queensland are examined.
6.1.1 Planning defined

Planning may be defined as the coordination of
human activities with both natural and human
resources (Ramsay & Rowe 1995). It can be a
process used by individuals, groups or collectives of
groups to determine an agreed vision, a set of
objectives, or to determine strategies and monitor
and evaluate outcomes (Dale & Cowell 1999).
Marsh (1998) describes a number of activities that

are conventionally associated with environmental
planning (see table 6.1). He notes that the methods
and techniques used in environmental and
landscape (regional) planning are no different from
those in other areas of planning. These categories
of planning are currently used in a number of
aspects of vegetation management.
Why plan?
Dale and Bellamy (1998), in their review of the
evolution of regional planning theory, highlight the
debate in the literature between those who view
planning from a technical perspective and those
who view it as a forum for negotiating across
conflicting agendas. The former advocates a
centralised planning approach whereby planning is
instigated by government agencies, the latter a
political process of bargaining and negotiating
among competing interests (Dale & Bellamy 1998).
Dale and Bellamy (1998) highlight that the focus of
the literature revolves around physical factors (eg:
infrastructure development), resolving intra- and
international economic inequities and the
application of GIS and decision-support systems by
central planning agencies. More recent approaches
in planning theory acknowledge that the planning
environment can be better described as a complex
web of bargaining and negotiation among plural
interests (including community, industry and
government) (Dale & Cowell 1999). These more
recent approaches to planning offer an opportunity
to use planning as a framework for negotiation
among diverse interests in land-use outcomes.
Changes in the economic, ecological and
sociological disciplines have converged towards a
system view of interactions and the relationships
between system componentsin essence, a
growing acknowledgment that nothing happens in
Table 6.1 Conventional activities associated with landscape planning. Adapted from Marsh (1998).
Activities of landscape planning
Description
Environmental inventory
catalogue and description of the features and resources of a study area
Discovery of opportunity and constraints
searching the environment for those features and situations that would
facilitate/deter a proposed land use
Site assessment
providing environmental profiles of site/s
Land capability, carrying capacity,

sustainability planning
determining what types of use and how much use the land can accommodate
without degradation
Hazard assessment and risk management
identifying dangerous zones in the environment and building strategies and

contingency plans for coping with hazards
Forecasting impacts
identifying changes required and evaluating the type and magnitude of

environmental impact
Special environments
analysing and evaluating special environments (e.g. wetlands)
Restoration and planning
assessing environments that have been degraded and require restoration
Site selection and feasibility studies
assessing locations usually based on economic, more recently environmental

considerations, or determining the most appropriate use for known site
Facility planning
siting, planning and designing installations that depend on structural and mechanical
systems (e.g. sewerage plants, airfields)
Master planning
may include all of the above, providing a comprehensive framework to guide land
change
Management planning
providing comprehensive ongoing control to ensure sustainability through

compatibility with greater land use
115
isolation and that activities are nested within

contexts, either biophysical or social. Brunkhorst
(1995) suggests that these areas of research have
identified a previous failure by planning and
management to produce practical information for
decision making and planning that meets
socioeconomic needs while conserving and
respecting the limits of biophysical resources
(Brunkhorst 1995).
The response in planning theory has been the
exploration of planning systems. Planning has been
largely viewed as discrete activities undertaken by
an agency or organisation. However, in reality, in
any given region (e.g. catchment) or context (e.g.
rangelands) there are many planning activities
occurring which collectively comprise the planning
system (Dale & Cowell 1999). The system approach
identifies which units in the landscape are linked
and what activities impact on others. Essentially,
planning systems are the sum of activities at
different times and spatial scales, involve multiple
stakeholders and seek to achieve value-based
objectives (Dale & Cowell 1999).
An important aspect of this developing body of
natural resource management planning theory is
the greater expectation by the community of public
involvement in decision making and greater
accountability for environmental protection (Dale &
Bellamy 1998). This has resulted in the emergence
of a resource management paradigm based on
integrated ecosystem management and collaborative
decision-making. The health of the planning system
(i.e. its ability to achieve sustainability and equity)
depends on the collective understanding of natural
resource management problems, institutional
support for stakeholders negotiating the issues, and
the capacity of these groups to participate in
inherently political processes.
6.1.2 Regional approaches to

planning
In dealing specifically with questions of
environmental degradation, conservation and
sustainability, planning is often inextricably linked
to concepts of ecological theory. For example,
planning for ecological networks owes its
theoretical foundations to the island biogeography
theory (MacArthur & Wilson 1967) and
metapopulation theory (Levins 1969). A great deal
of current ecological study acknowledges the need
to look at environmental processes at the landscape
level (Barbault 1995; Tongway & Ludwig 1997).
Landscape ecology is a recently emerging discipline
that looks at environments on a whole landscape
scale to develop an integrated understanding of
these systems. In essence, it recognises that all
landscapes are mosaics of different habitat types,
and focuses on spatial patterns within these
mosaics, the influence of these patterns on
116
ecological processes, and how landscape mosaics

change over time. It also acknowledges that the
movement of animals, plants, water and wind, and
the flow of materials, energy and nutrients that are
transported in this way, are all central to the
functioning of the landscape and to its ecological
sustainability (Bennett 1999). Importantly, it
acknowledges the impact of both human-induced
and natural changes (McAlpin 1999). Landscape
ecology attempts to couple biodiversity, ecosystem
function and larger scale processes (Brunkhorst
1995) and allows an opportunity to explore the
ecological function of habitat fragments in
developed environments.
In the same way that modern planning theory takes
a systems approach, so too does the ecological
study of landscape ecology. The importance of
linking these two disciplines lies in ensuring
landscape or regional approaches. There is
increasing recognition that ecologically sustainable
management and conservation of natural resources
cannot be tackled on a site-by-site basis, but
needs to be dealt with at the landscape scale
(Kitching 1996; Sattler et al. 1997). Regional
planning can utilise the dynamic approach of
ecology to understand and plan for the variability
and change that landscape ecology emphasises.
Landscape ecology provides the concepts and
techniques for conserving biodiversity and solving
land-use management problems.
Landscape planning (cf: land-use planning) is
concerned with resource allocation at the macro
scale where it was previously based on political
boundaries, watersheds or other landmarks
(Cook & van Lier 1994). Landscape or regional
planning seeks to meet the goals of ESD, aesthetics,
recreation and tourism, economics, human health
and ecological conservation, while satisfying the
need for complex inter-agency, multi-level planning
and management strategies that cross
anthropogenic or political boundaries (Cook &
van Lier 1994).
Biodiversity planning requires information on the
distribution of ecosystems, species and genetic
variation (section 3.2). While all biological surveys
are expensive, species and genetic surveys are
particularly time consuming and typically sample
only a very small proportion of the total area of a
region and its species or species groups
(e.g. mammals and birds may be relatively well
sampled, but not invertebrates or lower plant
species). This patchy nature of species and genetic
data is often addressed by using surrogate
measures of species distributions (Resource
Assessment Commission 1993; Wessels et al.
1999). Types of surrogates used in Australia for
biodiversity planning include mapped land classes
(vegetation and land systems) environmental
classifications derived from numerical analysis of
environmental attributes (e.g. terrain and soils) and

modelled species distributions. Recent work on the
effectiveness of surrogates for biodiversity suggests
that a range of the commonly used surrogates do
predict species distributions although the
effectiveness varies with type of surrogate, species
groups and regions (Ferrier & Watson 1997).
In Queensland, a system of defining regional
ecosystems has been developed (Sattler & Williams
1999). They are defined as vegetation communities
in a biogeographic region, which are consistently
associated with a particular combination of geology,
landform and soil. They are widely used as a
biodiversity planning tool in Queensland in
conjunction with information on the distribution of
individual species over much of the State. The
integrated nature of regional ecosystems is believed
to provide a robust classification for biodiversity
planning that maximises their use as a surrogate for
other levels of biodiversity (Sattler & Williams 1999).
Regional ecosystems generally provide an effective
surrogate for biodiversity. The use of this
classification can be justified on the grounds that
they are derived in a systematic way based on
sound ecological principles and that they can be
mapped. Maps are advantageous in biodiversity
planning because the definition of the status (e.g.
intact or reservation ) and the distribution of our
biota, are critical The regional ecosystem
classification is used to define the range of
ecosystems needed to provide habitat for the full
range of species-level biodiversity.
The use of the bioregional or regional classification
of ecosystems is often referred to in the concept of
bioregional planning. Powell (1996) notes that the
application of the term bioregional in the context
of planning in Australia emphasises the supremacy
of natural units over other jurisdictional areas,
including political divisions. Powell maintains that
the process not only includes the importance of
ecological entities, but also expands spatial vision
and promotes public participation in the process.
The Global Biodiversity Strategy defines a bioregion
as being:
large enough to maintain the integrity of its
biological communities, habitats and ecosystems
having cultural identity and a sense of home to
its local residents
containing a mosaic of land uses
having components which are dynamic and
interactive (Lambert & Elix 1996).
Brunkhorst (1995) asserts that a strategic
bioregional framework for planning and
management should reflect nature and society. He
suggests that it should be multi-stakeholder groups
that are striving to establish cooperative programs
that address ecological, cultural and economic
issues at the scale of the regional landscape. He
also recommends that the management paradigm
be ecologically sustainable use, strongly supported
by research and monitoring, core protected areas,

rehabilitation, and the reduction and management
of human impacts.
Historically, conservation of biodiversity has been
restricted to protected or reserve areas, but their
establishment has generally been opportunistic.
Such areas continue to play a role in conservation,
but it is increasingly acknowledged that the reserve
system is not in itself the solution. Brunkhorst
(1995) suggests that the function of reserves should
go beyond protection, as they represent areas for
rehabilitation of environments, nutrient sinks,
landscape stability, and the replenishment of
species assemblages and recruitment. The
recognition of the need to connect these reserves
with outside areas has led to the inclusion of
ecological links in bioregional planning, and reflects
the concepts developed in landscape ecology.
Brunkhorst (1995) asserts that these connectivities
already exist in naturewe need human
management systems which reflect these natural
processesa bioregional planning framework could
help achieve these common goals. Dale and
Bellamy (1998) note however, that regions are far
more frequently based on administrative and
economic factors than bioregional considerations.
On a geographically lower level than bioregional
planning, there has been the evolution of strategic
planning, at metropolitan and local levels (Neilson
1996). Neilson defines strategic plans as a means
of addressing the broadly-based, forward planning,
economic, social, cultural and environmental
aspects of development as well as the social and
economic infrastructure.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR
1999e), in providing guidelines for the development
of regional strategies, describes regional planning
as the linking mechanism between bottom-up
community planning (i.e. property and catchment
planning) and top-down principle-based
institutional planning (e.g. international
agreements, national and State-wide natural
resource management strategies). They emphasise
the need for this intermediate level to integrate well
with surrounding levels of planning.
Opportunities and limitations of regional

planning
Dale and Bellamy (1998) argue that while there has
been substantial regional planning, its effectiveness
has been limited. They note the following issues
hindering implementation of integrated regional or
landscape planning schemes or strategies:
The practical problems of integrating information
that is disparate across time, space and
academic boundaries, thus inhibiting the
integration and sharing of information.
The difference in the character of the problem
and the available analytical approaches or
institutional arrangements.
117
The fact that there is often a mismatch between

the available technical information and decisionmaking needs.
The inability to gain full public participation in
the decision-making process because of
ineffective institutional arrangements.
The lack of comprehensive integration of
legislation, administrative responsibilities and
operational management that would reflect the
complexities and interrelatedness of the various
elements of the natural and human resource
systems.
Sustainabilityplanning needs to achieve

sustainable outcomes in natural resource
management, although measurement and
definition of sustainability are vexacious, and
there has been limited integration of economic,
social and ecological sustainability.
An integrated approach to environmental planning

and management is an important and emerging
element of regional planning. Dale and Bellamy
(1998) report that much of the conceptual
development and experience in Australian regional
planning relates to catchment management.
However, these concepts have proved difficult to
implement in practice because integrated
environmental management is a developing concept
and lacks a well-defined body of guiding principles.
They also argue that ecological theory has been
poorly integrated into the planning literature. If
resource use planning is to occur in Australia, then
facilitators will need to craft their own approach to
meet the political context. They recommend that
the following three core elements are required for
regional planning:
effective application of technical information (in
the biological, social and economic sciences) and
appropriate information technologies to assist in
structuring frameworks for negotiation among
stakeholders and to better inform the negotiation
process
structuring, operating, institutionalising,
implementing and monitoring regional planning
in a way that facilitates active negotiation among
stakeholders within the planning arena
processes which ensure that stakeholder groups
involved in the planning negotiations are able to
represent their constituents through appropriate
participatory methods, giving credibility to the
agreements negotiated as a result of the regional
planning process.
Accountabilitythose planning activities must

be accountable to the stakeholders, and this
reflects governments accountability to their
constituents.
Dale and Cowell (1999) argue that in order to

improve the health of the planning system at a
regional scale it is necessary to :
build regional sectoral capacity
establish a better institutional basis for
structured negotiations at the regional scale
ensure that each stage of the process is well
informed by technical information.
118
Dale and Bellamy (1998) argue that there are key

principles that should underpin such activities, and
be used to assess the effectiveness of regional
planning. These include ensuring that all elements
are adaptive and adequate, and are applied in a
way that is sustainable, equitable, accountable,
integrated, effective and efficient (see box 6.1).
Equityis closely associated with an

individuals overall judgement of the inherent
fairness of the planning process, and will
determine willingness and commitment to the
outcome.
Integrationpoor integration between planning

disciplines, activities and institutional
arrangements has previously caused planning
problems This has resulted in inefficiencies and
inequities, favouring economic rather than
social and environmental objectives.
Adequacychecks that negotiatory and
participatory elements are working, and asks
whether interventions are being applied at
appropriate levels to get the job done.
Effectivenessmeans checking that planning
activities result in meaningful and effective
outcomes.
Efficiencyrepresents outcomes achieved from
inputs to the planning process, and must not
be considered in isolation from those
outcomes.
Adaptivenessplanning systems must
demonstrate the capacity to make strategic and
operational change.
Box 6.1 Principles for regional resource-use planning.
Source: Dale & Bellamy (1999).
6.1.3 Planning for vegetation

management
This review has examined in detail many of the
scientific arguments for how and why native
vegetation in Queensland should be managed. This
section has demonstrated both the opportunities
and the limitations of planning in sustainable
natural resource management, particularly at
regional scales. In considering Queenslands
substantial native vegetation resource, it is evident
that planning certainly has a role to play in
addressing the threats and opportunities involved
in securing its sustainable management. As
highlighted in section 2, a number of legislative
instruments have adopted planning approaches to
managing natural resources, for example in the
Integrated Planning Act 1997 (Qld) and in particular
managing native vegetation, for example, Tree
Management Plans under the Land Act 1994 (Qld).

With the introduction of the Vegetation Management
Act 1999 (Qld)12, there are further opportunities to
manage native vegetation through planning and
strategic processes both on the property and at
regional scale.
In particular, the Vegetation Management Act 1999
(Qld) provides for the development of regional
vegetation management plans (RVMPs) by regional
committees.
In essence these regional committees will:
1. Prepare a regional vegetation management plan
for a given region that will include:
outcomes for vegetation management
a code for the clearing of vegetation on
freehold land under the Integrated Planning Act
1997 (Qld) which achieves the purpose of the
State code
local guidelines for tree clearing on leasehold
and State land under the Land Act 1994 (Qld)
other actions proposed to achieve the
outcomes.
2. Formalise guidelines for achieving best practice
vegetation management in the region.
3. Prepare a spatial representation of the RVMP.
4. Develop and implement consultation and
communication strategies for the formulation of
the RVMP.
It is possible that the RVMP process, or associated
regional strategies, may facilitate the following :
the integration of the RVMP and vegetation
management with other natural resource
management initiatives in the region
monitoring, reviewing and evaluating the RVMP
the regional delivery of sustainable native
vegetation management services, including
incentive programs for landholders
the identification of areas to be declared as
having high nature conservation values or as
vulnerable to land degradation.
Development of RVMPs presents the opportunity to
use the processes developed in landscape ecology
and the concepts of participatory approaches
developed in planning theory. Up-to-date
information on the extent and conservation status
of native vegetation is available through the
Queensland Herbariums Regional Ecosystem
Mapping project (see section 1.2) and offers an
ecological basis for vegetation planning, rather than
boundaries based on social or administrative
considerations. By basing plans on regional
information, generic State-wide guidelines can be
refined locally, and regional land degradation risks
can be assessed. It is important that these
opportunities and limitations are considered in
developing RVMPs. A planning systems approach
would specifically argue that RVMPs should not be
expected to solve a regions problems, but could
constructively contribute to the development of an
improved regional planning system. It would then

recommend some clear parameters for use in
conducting the RVMP process.
Lambeck (1999) has described an approach to
regional biodiversity conservation in agricultural
areas that uses an evaluation of the conservation
needs of at-risk plant and animal species as a
template for planning vegetation retention and
configuration. Information of this kind can be used
as a basis for regional vegetation planning.
The challenge for government agencies and
community groups is how to develop methods of
implementing regional plans through actions at the
property level. While legislative changes will
provide an impetus, successful vegetation
management is likely to depend on fostering a
sense of ownership of the issue among landholders
and successful facilitation of an integrated
ecosystem approach.
6.1.4 Property planning

Landholders use a variety of formal and informal
plans to manage their properties for production.
The Department of Land and Water Conservation,
New South Wales (1995) describes property
management planning as the process of analysis
and then planning property operation from
personal, physical and financial perspectives.
Planning the management of vegetation in
particular can help to:
secure the long-term viability of a property
protect biodiversity and prevent soil erosion and
salinity
protect catchments and keep them healthy
control pests using integrated pest management
provide production values such as shade and
shelter.
Under both the Land Act 1994 (Qld) and the
Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld), applications
for a permit to clear trees must be accompanied by
a property vegetation management plan (PVMP)13,
which details the type, area and location of
vegetation proposed to be cleared.
Formalising PVMPs may assist landholders by
increasing awareness of vegetation on the property,
identifying areas vulnerable to degradation that
should be retained and identification of areas of
degradation. The general principles of planning
apply at this level of planning as they do to other
levels.
6.1.5 Configuration of remnant

vegetation
The trend has been to clear the most productive
elements within a landscape completely and to
leave surrounding, less productive areas with the
vegetation intact. While this may ensure that a
large area of the property or paddock remains
covered in woody vegetation, it reduces habitat
diversity. To maintain and conserve biodiversity it is
119
recommended that 30% of each regional

ecosystem is retained (see section 4.1).
Importantly, the mix of land uses should be
considered and threshold parameters taken into
account. For example McIntyre et al. (1999)
recommend a mix of 30% retention of woody
vegetation, 10% of the area managed specifically
for wildlife and a maximum of 30% used
intensively (cropping, exotic pastures). These, in
combination with other thresholds, are required to
support the bulk of plant and animal species in
grassy woodlands in south-east Queensland.
The most appropriate configuration of retained
vegetation will depend on the planned land use.
For example, where potential salinisation is a
concern, intake areas should support native woody
vegetation; where shelter from cold winds is
required, south and south-western slopes should
be left covered by trees. Where trees encourage
growth beneath their canopy, some scattering of
trees may be beneficial. Scattered trees may also
reduce temperature extremes and in tropical to
subtropical environments this may be sufficient to
prevent frosting of pastures (McIvor 1990a).
Retained vegetation can be in the form of strips or
clumps. Clumps are more effective in that a greater
proportion of the total retained area is natural
(minimal edge effect) compared with strips (see
section 4.1.2). The wider the strip, the larger the
natural habitat area for the same reserved area.
Strips should also interconnect with large
undisturbed or natural habitat (clumps or
reserves). Clumps must be large enough to support
a viable population of wildlife and should be joined
to other native vegetation areas to allow movement
between major reserved areas (Bennett 1999). It is
important to diversify structure (i.e. a combination
of strips, clumps and patches) to allow greater
resilience to disturbances.
Another option for retaining some woody vegetation
and increasing livestock carrying capacity is to thin
the existing stand, leaving a savanna landscape.
This has aesthetic appeal, but in most situations a
savanna is undesirable. Problems may include: 1)
the habitat for native fauna and flora is
dramatically altered (unless the original vegetation
was a savanna and the density had markedly
increased); 2) that remaining trees are likely to have
a shorter lifespan, and are more prone to insect
and disease attack, and to fire damage; (see section
4.2.1 Dieback); 3) that pasture production is often
lower from a savanna landscape than from an area
in which the equivalent number of trees were
retained in undisturbed habitat while the
complement of the area was cleared (Burrows et al.
1988a); and 4) the mature remaining trees are seed
trees that ensure a seed source to re-establish new
trees, thereby creating an inherent regrowth
problem. As few as 40 trees/ha, each 10 m high,
120
can result in three-quarters of an area being subject

to seed rain, whereas the same number of smaller
trees potentially impacts a mere 10% of the area.
However, a savanna landscape can be desirable
where the canopied zone is more productive than
the interspaces. Reasons for this include increased
total soil nutrient levels (Dowling et al. 1986;
Ebersohn & Lucas 1965), and indirect effects of
shade (Wilson et al. 1986; Wilson et al. 1990a).
However, this situation occurs in very limited areas
within Queensland.
6.1.6 How do the different layers of

planning relate?
The emphasis of these initiatives on decision
making at the property level is understandable,
given that the individual property is the unit for
resource use decisions. However, approaches to
resource management based solely at this level do
not always adequately address the wider-scale
issues involved. The geophysical and ecological
influences of soil, water and vegetation use operate
at scales well beyond the borders of individual
properties. Hence, a broader perspective is required
for long-term, ecologically-based, rational resource
use. Incremental degradation of resources is a wellknown phenomenon. At the same time, land tenure
is a fundamental part of the management
environment and broader objectives cannot be met
without the involvement of all resource users.
There is a need to combine regional issues and
management strategies with the implementation of
actions at a property scale that collectively
addresses these issues. Over the last decade or
two, the development of the landcare movement
and integrated catchment management has been a
positive response to this need. For example, the
goals of the Queensland Decade of Landcare (DNR
1997) include the minimisation of adverse effects of
land use and the integration of production and
nature conservation, assessing needs on a regional
rather than an individual farm basis. Similar
strategies have been identified by numerous other
community-based, resource management groups.
Various legislative instruments (see section 2.0),
and other institutional arrangements (e.g.
catchment and property management plans)
operate to provide a wide range of planning
activities in the regions. The Broadscale Tree
Clearing Policy (1997)14 incorporated regional
issues such as protection of riparian areas and
conservation of threatened plant communities, but
still primarily addressed these issues through
prescriptions at the property level. RVMPs offer the
opportunity to plan upwards from the property,
bringing the details and experience at this level up
to the regional approach, and incorporate already
established regional strategies and plans to develop
an integrated, and improved planning system.
6.2 Monitoring
The use of adaptive management is an important
aspect of regional planning (Iles 1996; Dale &
Bellamy 1998). Adaptive management is an
approach to environmental policy that treats policy
measures as experiments to be learned from
(Iles 1996). By monitoring the results of policy or
planning, modification of management and
strategies can be made via a feedback loop. This
approach contrasts the traditional, centralised, topdown, static framework for management and
acknowledges the dynamic nature of ecosystems.
Monitoring requires that there be effective indicators
of sustainability to measure. These indicators may
monitor productivity and ecosystem health.
Medium to long-term monitoring of the effects of
management is vital because:
it is important to keep a record of impacts within
a remnant after any management action, so that
an understanding of the effect of a range of
management prescriptions can be constructed
repeated observations and monitoring are
necessary to assess whether adapted landmanagement practises are having the desired
effect. If not, they can then be altered accordingly
to allow for the amelioration of impacts.
Monitoring at the property scale includes those
managerial functions that are necessary to
measure the performance of a property with
respect to its progress toward achieving the goals
and objectives established during the planning
phase (Stuth et al 1991). There are two main
components to monitoring:
gathering and maintaining information
analysis and interpretation of this information to
measure performance and diagnose problems.
The monitoring of livestock numbers, livestock
productivity (growth rates, wool returns,
reproductive rate, livestock sales etc.) are generally
the most useful indicators of productivity and
economic status (Wilson et al. 1990b). However,
animal productivity is not always a good indicator
of resource condition, as animal production can be
maintained for some time after pasture
deterioration has occurred (Beale et al. 1984). It is
important to recognise that no single measure or
standard technique will describe the condition of
the land resource. The type of land use and the
objectives of management will define the specific
attributes that should be measured and the way in
which they are measured (Wilson et al. 1990b).
The purpose of monitoring land resources

For pastoral enterprises, the major source of
income is from the production of livestock. The
long-term viability of a property therefore depends
on maintaining the condition and vigour of the
vegetation on which livestock graze (Muir 1992).
It therefore makes sound business sense to monitor

the condition of the major resources of the
enterprise (vegetation, water and soils).
Monitoring the productivity of vegetation primarily
involves measuring changes in vegetation, and
subsequent effects on livestock production and soil
erosion. Vegetation is easier to measure, can be
interpreted in terms of its effects on potential
productivity and soil protection and is a more
sensitive indicator of ecosystem change than
livestock are (Wilson et al. 1990b). Monitoring
change in vegetation condition can therefore
enable adjustment of land management practices
(Bonham 1989).
It is traditionally accepted that remnant size, shape
and proximity to other areas of native vegetation are
critical variables affecting the persistence of native
species and the invasion by exotic species (Saunders
& Hobbs, 1991). Other factors affecting the condition
and functioning of remnants include the type and
intensity of disturbances that the remnant has been
subject to, and the vegetation types, which vary in
their levels of natural resilience and resistance to
change. Despite these influences, degraded
remnants are still valuable in the landscape in terms
of property productivity and regional conservation,
although it is assumed that remnants with a higher
degree of naturalness are better able to provide
these values across the landscape.
Monitoring of remnant vegetation allows an
evaluation of existing land-management practices
and assesses the potential impacts on the condition
and long-term viability of the remnant patch or
strip. (Dallmeier & Comiskey 1998)
At present there are few published studies in

Queensland that deal specifically with remnant
condition and function in terms of community
structure, impacts of disturbance and habitat values.
The effective long-term management of remnant
vegetation requires adequate property-level,
baseline data to enable better informed
management decisions. From a landholder
perspective, the simplest and most effective method
of monitoring is to record all observations and
management actions affecting remnant vegetation.
Photographs of the remnant may be included for
future comparisons, especially as evidence of
thickening of the understorey shrub layer, or of
degradation of vegetation condition over time.
Photographic records are an effective means of
assessing change over time or as a means of
comparing the condition of similar forest types that
have been subject to varying management
practices. A property map including locations of
remnant strips and patches of native vegetation will
be useful in providing baseline data.
121
There are many vegetation and soil monitoring

tools available in Queensland. These range from
intensive procedures used by researchers
examining specific ecosystem processes to simple
techniques used by land managers to visually
monitor trends in vegetation. Detailed descriptions
of the steps to consider when developing a
monitoring program can be found in Brown 1954;
Bonham 1989; Wilson et al. 1990b; DNR 1999d;
and Forge 1997.
For land administrators who are interested in a
regional perspective, some major tools are
available. Firstly, the TRAPS and QGRAZE network
of vegetation monitoring sites established across
Queensland. Secondly, the remote sensing
monitoring conducted by the Department of
Natural Resources in the Statewide Landcover and
Trees Study (SLATS).
It is essential that the objectives of any monitoring
program be clearly defined at the outset. This will
greatly assist in determining what will be measured
and how it will be measured. It is essential to focus
on the plant, water and soil characteristics that can
be monitored to detect change at a scale relevant to
the level of management.
122
Endnotes
1
Under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld), ecosystem

status is assessed using criteria relating solely to habitat loss as
indicated by the preclearing and remnant area. This differs from
the ecosystem conservation status in Sattler & Williams (1999),
which includes criteria relating to other threatening processes
such as grazing degradation. (See table 1.6.)
Note the impact of Mabo and Others v. Queensland (No. 2)

175 CLR 1. Since European settlement, land administration in
Australia has been based on the traditional doctrine that
Australia was terra nullius (land belonging to no one) at the time
of European settlement. The decision in Mabo (No. 2) established
at common law that native title may have survived where it had
not been lost or extinguished. Where native title has been lost or
completely extinguished there are no rights remaining to be
recognised. Where native title continues to exist, the common
law recognises the rights of the native titleholders in a similar
way to the recognition of the rights of ordinary titleholders.
Note that this is currently under review.
Department of Primary Industries recommendations of 20% are

retention levels beyond vulnerable areas, (e.g. steep slopes,
riparian zones etc.).
This estimate, made in 1991 (Gordon 1991), was based on a

survey of regional extension staff. At the time, Department of
Natural Resources extension staff estimated that 10 000 ha were
severely affected and approximately 75 000 ha were at risk. This
figure may now be an underestimate, as the area at risk in the
MurrayDarling basin within Queensland has recently been
estimated at 600 000 ha (MDBC 1999).
This is the proportion of applied water required to drain through

the root zone to maintain soil salinity at an acceptable
concentration.
Forest is an area, incorporating all living and non-living

components, dominated by trees having usually a single stem
and a mature or potentially mature stand height exceeding two
metres, and with existing or potential crown cover of overstorey
strata about equal to, or greater than 20%. It is also sufficiently
broad to encompass areas of trees that are described as
woodlands (DPIE 1998a).
Some clearing may also occur for other reasons, including

experimentation with pasture development on new landscape
types; making the area easier to muster; and responding to the
risk that governments might impose further clearing restrictions.
However, the dominant expectation is that clearing will increase
overall returns.
The material in this paragraph and the following four paragraphs

on carbon emissions has been taken from Rolfe et al. (2000).
10
W. H. Burrows (2000 pers. comm., 25 April) reports that

estimates of above-ground biomass for eucalypts in northern
Queensland are being revised upwards, and may be
approximately 6 tonnes per m2 of basal area.
11
Prices for carbon offsets are likely to fall further as new

opportunities for offsets are found and markets continue to
develop.
12
Not yet proclaimed, at the time of publication.
13
Referred to under the Land Act 1994 (Qld) as a tree

management plan.
14
Replaced in 1999 by A Broadscale Tree Clearing Policy for

Leasehold Land.
return to contents
Bibliography
135
ABARE (1995) Analysis of the Economic Impacts of the Draft State Guidelines on Tree Clearing in Queensland, consultancy
report to the Ministerial Consultative Committee and the Working Group on Tree Clearing, Brisbane
ABARE (1998) The Australian Beef Industry 1998, ABARE Research Report 98.7, Canberra
ABARE (1999) The Australian Beef Industry 1999, ABARE Research Report 99.10, Canberra
Abensperg-Traun M and Smith GT (1993) Predictable effects of agricultural development on the long term availability
of hollows for animals: observations from the western Australian wheat belt, Pacific Conservation Biology, 1:78-79
Abensperg-Traun M, Arnold GW, Steven DE, Smith GT, Atkins L, Viveen JJ and Gutter M (1996a) Biodiversity indicators
in semi-arid, agricultural Western Australia, Pacific Conservation Biology, 2:375-389
Abensperg-Traun M, Smith GT, Arnold GW and Steven DE (1996b) The effects of habitat fragmentation and livestock
grazing on animal communities in remnants of gimlet Eucalyptus salubris woodland in the Western Australian wheatbelt
I. Arthropods, Journal of Applied Ecology, 33:1281-1301
Abensperg-Traun M, Lynn A, Hobbs R and Steven DE (1998) Exotic plant invasion and understorey species richness: A
comparison of two types of eucalypt woodland in agricultural Western Australia, Pacific Conservation Biology, 4:21-32
Abernethy B and Rutherfurd I (1999a) Riverbank reinforcement by riparian roots, Proceedings of the Second Australian
Stream Management Conference 8-11 February 1999, Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 1-7
Abernethy B and Rutherfurd I (1999b) Guidelines for Stabilising Streambanks with Riparian Vegetation, Cooperative Research
Centre for Catchment Hydrology Technical Report 99/10 September 1999
Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources and on Agriculture (2000) Report of
the Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources and on Agriculture, New York,
28 February-3 March 2000, Commission on Sustainable Development, 8th Session 24 April-5 May, (unpublished)
AFFADepartment of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (1997) Assessing The Sustainability Of Forest Management,
Montreal Process Working Group 5 November 1997, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra
AFFADepartment of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (1999) Managing Natural Resources in Rural Australia for a
Sustainable Future, National Natural Resource Management Task Force, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and
Forestry, Canberra
AGOAustralian Greenhouse Office (1998a) Emissions trading and carbon credits, Playing Our Part: Australias Action
to Reduce Global Warming, Leaflet of the Australian Greenhouse Office, Canberra
AGOAustralian Greenhouse Office (1998b) National Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Highlights from the National Greenhouse
Gas Inventory 1996, Australian Greenhouse Office, Canberra
Ahern CR and Turner EJ (1993) Soils, Western Arid Region Land Use Study Part V. Technical Bulletin No 30. Division of
Land Utilisation, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland, pp. 17-48
Ahern CR, Shields PG, Enderlin NG and Baker DE (1994) Soil fertility of Central and North-East Queensland grazing land,
Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Aitken RL, Moody PW, Noble AD and Kingston G (1998) Queensland soilsbeautiful one day, acidified the next: can
we make them perfect again?, Proceedings of the 3rd National Soil Acidification Conference, Coolum, 15-17 July, Land and
Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
Alling A, Nelson M and Silverstone S (2000) Life Under Glass, Synergetic Press, Santa Fe NM, USA
Allingham J (1989) Field day notes, The Management of Eucalypt Country in North Queensland Dalrymple Land Care
Committee, Charters Towers
Anderson ER (1984) The native woody weed problem following brigalow development in Australia, Proceedings of the
Brigalow Belt of Australia Symposium, Brisbane, 1982, Brisbane, pp. 183-92
Anderson ER (1993) Plants of Central Queensland: Their Identification and Uses, Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Andersen A (1999) Cross-cultural conflicts in fire management in Northern Australia: not so black and white,
Conservation Ecology, 3(1):6
Anderson LS and Bell SA (1995) Definition of the Researchable Constraints To Improved Production Potential And Sustainability
of Land Use Systems at the Forest-Agriculture Interface, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology Project T01064L1, University of
Wales, Bangor, UK
Anderson ER, Russell FJ, Scanlan JC and Fossett GW (1983) Survey of pastures under development I. Mackay region,
Land Resources Bulletin (DPI) QV 83002
Anderson ER, Scanlan JC, Fossett GW and Russell FJ (1984) Survey of pastures under development II Northern
Brigalow region, Land Resources Bulletin (DPI) QV84003
Anderson ER, Pressland AJ, McLennan SR, Clem RL and Rickert KG (1988) The role of fire in native pasture
management, Native Pastures in Queensland: The resources and their management, WH Burrows, JC Scanlan and MT
Rutherfords (eds.), Department of Primary Industries, Queensland, pp. 112-124
Andren H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of
suitable habitat: a review, OIKOS, 71:355-366
Andrew MH and Lange RT (1986a) Development of a new piosphere in arid chenopod shrubland grazed by sheep. 2.
Changes to the vegetation, Australian Journal of Ecology, 11:411-424
136
Andrew MH and Lange RT (1986b) Development of a new piosphere in arid chenopod shrubland grazed by sheep. 1.
Changes to the soil surface, Australian Journal of Ecology, 11:395-409
ANZECC (1993) Draft National Strategy for the Conservation of Australias Biological Diversity, Prepared by ANZECC Task
Force on Biological Diversity, Canberra
ANZECC and ARMCANZ (1999) National Principles and Guidelines for Rangeland Management Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra
ANZECC-MCFFA (1995) Broad Criteria for the Establishment of a Comprehensive, Adequate and Representative Forest Reserve
System in Australia, Draft report dated July 1995, Prepared by the Technical Working Group on reserve criteria for the
Joint ANZECC-MCFFA National Forest Policy Statement Implementation sub-Committee, Canberra
Archer D (1997) To Bc or not to Bc, Australian Bushfoods Magazine, 2:6-7
Archer S, Schimel DS and Holland EA (1995) Mechanisms of shrubland expansion: land use, climate or CO2?, Climate
Change, 29:91-99
Armstrong TH and Wells CH (1979) Herbicidal control of Baccharis halimifolia, Proceedings 7th Asian Pacific Weed
Science Society Conference, Asian Pacific Weed Science Society, Haymarket, NSW, pp.153-155
Arndt W (1965) The nature of the mechanical impedance of seedlings by surface seals, Australian Journal of Soil
Research, 3:45-54
Arnold GW and Weeldenburg JR (1998) The effects of isolation, habitat fragmentation and degradation by livestock
grazing on the use by birds of patches of gimlet Eucalyptus salubris woodlands in the wheatbelt of Western Australia
Pacific Conservation Biology, 4:155-163
Arthington AH, Bunn SE and Catterall CP (1992) The ecological roles of riparian vegetation, The Role of Buffer Strips in
the Management of Waterway Pollution from Diffuse Urban and Rural Sources, J Woodfull, B Finlayson and T McMahon (eds),
Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation and Centre for Environmental and Applied
Hydrology, University of Melbourne, pp. 93-102
Ash AJ, Prinsen JH, Myles, DJ and Hendricksen RE (1982) Short-term effects of burning native pasture on herbage and
animal production in south-east Queensland, Proceedings Australian Society for Animal Production, 14:377-380
Ash AJ, McIvor JG, Corfield JP and Winter WH (1995) How land condition alters plant-animal relationships in
Australias tropical rangelands, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 56:77-92
Ash A J, McIvor JG, Mott JJ and Andrew MH (1997) Building grass castles: integrating ecology and management of
Australias tropical tallgrass rangelands, Rangelands Journal, 19(2):123-144
Ashton DH, Bond H and Morris GC (1975) Drought damage on Mount Towrong, Victoria, Proceedings of the Linnean
Society of NSW, 100:4469
AUSLIGAustralian Surveying and Land Information Group (1990) Atlas of Australian Resources, Vegetation, Third Series
Volume 6, Department of Administrative Services, Canberra
Australian National University (1998) Non-wood Forest Products, Forestry Department, Australian National University,
Canberra
Australian Science and Technology Council (1993) Research and Technology in Tropical Australia and their Application to the
Development of the RegionSummary Report, AGPS, Canberra
Bache DE and MacAskil IA (1984) Vegetation in Civil and Landscape Engineering, Granada Publishing Limited, London
Back PV, Anderson ER, Burrows WH, Kennedy MKK and Carter OJ (1997) TRAPSTransect Recording and Processing
System: Field Guide and Software Manual, Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Rockhampton
Back PV, Burrows WH and Hoffman MB (1999), TRAPS: a method for monitoring the dynamics of trees and shrubs in
rangelands, People and Rangelands. Building the Future. Proceedings of Vlth International Rangeland Congression, 2: 742-744
Bacon P, Ward K, Craven P, Harper M and Bone B (1994) Floodplain land-use issues in the MurrayDarling Basin,
MurrayDarling Basin Wetlands Management, T Sharley and C Huggan (eds), MurrayDarling Basin Commission, Canberra
Barbault R (1995) Biodiversity dynamics: from population and community ecology approaches to a landscape ecology
point of view, Landscape and Urban Planning, 31:89-98
Bari MA and NJ Scholfield (1992) Lowering of a shallow, saline water table by extensive eucalypt reforestation, Journal
of Hydrology, 133:273-291
Barling RD and Moore ID (1993) The role of buffer strips in the management of waterway pollution, The Role of Buffer
Strips in the Management of Waterway Pollution from Diffuse Urban and Rural Sources, LWRRDC Occasional Paper 01/93,
LWRRDC, Canberra
Barlow BA (1994) Phytogeography of the Australian Region, Australian Vegetation 2nd edn, RH Groves (ed), Cambridge
University Press, pp. 3-36
Barrett GW, Ford HA and Recher HF (1994) Conservation of woodland birds in a fragmented rural landscape, Pacific
Conservation Biology, 1(3):245-57
Barson M and Barrett-Lennard E (1995) Productive use and rehabilitation of Australias saline lands, Australian Journal
of Soil and Water Conservation, 8(3):33-37
Barson MM, Muir T, Malafant K, Skjemstad JO and Janik L (1998) How big is Australias soil carbon store?, Climate
Change Newsletter, 10(2):12-13
Barson MM, Randall LA and Bordas VM (1999a) Rates of land cover change in Australia and implications for land
management, Handbook of the 1999 Meeting of the Ecological Society of Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia
137
Barson M, L Randall and V Bordas (1999b) Remote sensing of agricultural land cover change 19901995, results,
Climate Change Newsletter, 11(1):1-5
Barter SA (1986) An Economic Analysis of Soil Erosion Damage to Public Utilities, Report No. 9 of the Project Estimation of
Unpriced and Social Benefits of Soil Conservation, University of New England, Armidale
Baskin Y (1994) Ecosystem function of biodiversity: Regarding ideal levels of species richness the data are few and
unclear, BioScience, 44(10):657-660
Baskin Y (1997) The Work of Nature: How the Diversity of Life Sustains Us, Island Press, Washington DC
Beale IF (1973) Tree density effects on yields of herbage and tree components in south west Queensland mulga (Acacia
aneura) scrub, Tropical Grasslands, 7:135-142
Beale IF, Mills JR and Pressland AJ (1984) Use and conservation of arid rangeland in Queensland, Proceedings of a
Symposium on Rural Research into Arid Zone Pastoral Problems, Mt Isa, 1984, Queensland Department of Primary Industries,
pp. 1-7
Bebawi FF, Campbell SD, Grice AG and Lindsay AM (2000) Impact of fire on rubber vine (Cryptostegia grandiflora R. Br.)
and associated pasture and germinable seed bank in a sub-riparian habitat of north Queensland, Plant Protection
Quarterly, 15(2): 62-66
Beckmann R (1989) Rural dieback: restoring the balance, ECOS, 62: 9-15
Belsky A J, Mwonga SM, Amundson RG, Duxbury JM and Ali AR (1993) Comparative effects of isolated trees on their
undercanopy environments in high- and low- rainfall savannas, Journal of Applied Ecology, 30:143-155
Belsky AJ (1994) Influences of trees on savanna productivity: tests of shade, nutrients, and tree-grass competition,
Ecology, 75: 922-932
Belsky AJ, Amundson RG, Duxbury JM, Riha SJ, Ali AR and Mwonga SM (1989) The effects of trees on their physical,
chemical, and biological environments in a semi-arid savanna in Kenya, Journal of Applied Ecology, 26:1005-1024.
Bennett JW (1984) Using direct questioning to value the existence benefits of preserved natural areas, Australian
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 28(2/3):136-152
Bennett A (1994) Conservation Values and the Management of Streamside Vegetation, Unpublished Report, Flora and Fauna
branch, CNR, Victoria
Bennett AF (1999) Linkages in the Landscape, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources,
Cambridge
Bennett JW and Carter M (1993) Prospects for contingent valuation: Lessons from the South-East forests, Australian
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 37(2):79-93
Bennett AF and Ford LA (1997) Land use, habitat change and the conservation of birds in fragmented environments: a
landscape perspective from the Northern Plains, Victoria, Australia, Pacific Conservation Biology, 3(3): 244-261
Benson JS and PA Redpath, (1997) The nature of pre-European native vegetation in south-eastern Australia: a critique
of Ryan, D. G., Ryan, J.R. and Star, B.J. (1995) The Australian LandscapeObservations of Explorers and Early Settlers,
Cunninghamii, 5:285-328
Biological Diversity Advisory Committee (1992) A National Strategy for the Conservation Of Australias Biological Diversity:
Draft, AGPS, Canberra
Bird PR (1984) Effect of trees on agricultural productivity, Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on the Decline of
Trees in the Rural Landscape, AJ Hofler (ed), University of New England
Bird PR (1998) Tree windbreaks and shelter benefits to pasture in temperate grazing systems Agroforestry Systems,
41:35-54
Bird PR, Lynch JJ and Obst JM (1984) Effect of shelter on plant and animal production, Proceedings of the Australian
Society of Animal Production, 15:270-273
Bishop HG, Hilder TB, Lambert GA, Dodt RM and Bahnisch G (1999) Reclaiming and sustaining the productivity of
Queensland bluegrass pastures, People and Rangelands Building the Future: Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland
Congress, D Eldridge and D Freudenberger (eds), International Rangeland Congress 6th 1999, Townsville, Queensland,
pp. 239-240
Black A, Duff J, Saggers S and Baines P (1999) Rural Communities and Rural Social Issues: Priorities for Research, Centre for
Social Research, Edith Cowan University
Blacket D. and Thompson P. (1992) Pasture establishment, Sown Pasture Management Notes. Western Downs and
Maranoa, D Lawrence and V French (eds), Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane.
Blackmore AC, Mentis MT and Scholes RJ (1990) The origin and extent of nutrient enriched patches within a nutrient
poor savannah in South Africa, Journal of Biogeography, 17:229-258
Blake ST and Roff C (1988) The Honey Flora of Queensland (3rd edition), Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Boland KT (1997) Anthropogenic threats to the viability of wetlands in northern Australia, Wetlands in a Dry Land:
Understanding for Management, WD Williams (ed), Environment Australia, Biodiversity Group, Canberra
Bolton G (1992) Spoils and Spoilers: A history of Australians shaping their environment (2nd Ed), Allen and Unwin, Sydney
Bonham CD (1989) Measurements for Terrestrial Vegetation, Wiley and Sons, New York
138
Boon PI and Bailey PCE (1997) Implications of nutrient enrichment for management of primary productivity in
wetlands, Wetlands in a Dry Land: Understanding for Management, WD Williams (ed), Environment Australia, Biodiversity
Group, Canberra
Borrini-Feyerabend G (1996) Collaborative Management of Protected Areas: Tailoring the Approach to the Context, IUCN,
Gland, Switzerland
Bosshard A (2000) A methodology and terminology of sustainability assessment and its perspectives for rural
planning, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 77:29-41
Bouman OT and Brand DG (eds) (1997) Sustainable Forests: Global Challenges and Local Solutions, Haworth Press, London
Bourke W, Stenson M, McNeil V and Bloedel L (1999) Projection of the Groundwater Discharge and Saltloads for the Catchments
of the Murray Darling Basin: Summary of Methods and Results, Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane
Bowman DMJS (1998) Tansley Review No. 101: The impact of Aboriginal landscape burning on the Australian biota,
New-Phytologist, 140(3):385-410
Boyland DE (1984) Vegetation survey of QueenslandSouth Western Queensland, Queensland Botany Bulletin No. 4,
Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Boyle A (1998) Revegetation technique counters biodiversity loss, Australian Landcare, September 1998, pp. 36-37
Braunack MV and Walker J (1985) Recovery of some surface soil properties of ecological interest after sheep grazing in
a semi-arid woodland, Australian Journal of Ecology, 10:451-460
Braysher ML (1993) Managing Vertebrate Pests: Principles and Strategies, Bureau of Resource Sciences, AGPS, Canberra
Breckwoldt R (1986) The Last StandManaging Australias Remnant Forests and Woodlands, Australian Government
Publishing Service, Canberra
Breckwoldt R (2000) The Social, Economic and Institutional Drivers of Land Clearing, Draft report to the Australian
Greenhouse Office, unpublished
Bridge BJ, Mott JJ and Hartigan RJ (1983) The formation of degraded areas in the dry savanna woodland of Northern
Australia, Australian Journal of Soil Research, 21:91-104
Bridgewater PB (1990) The role of synthetic vegetation in present and future landscapes of Australia, Proceedings of
Ecological Society of Australia, 16:129134
Brock MA (1997) Understanding plant germination, establishment and reproduction for wetland revegetation,
Wetlands in a Dry Land: Understanding for Management, WD Williams (ed) Environment Australia, Biodiversity Group,
Canberra, pp. 131-136
Bromham L, Cardillo M, Bennett AF and Elgar MA (1999) Effects of stock grazing on the ground invertebrate fauna of
woodland remnants, Australian Journal of Ecology, 24:199-207
Brown D (1954) Methods of surveying and measuring vegetation, Bulletin No. 42, Commonwealth Bureau of Pastures and
Field Crops, Hurley, Berks, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux Farnham Royal, Bucks, England
Brown T (1997) Conservation Biology and Utilisation of the Australian Flora, Subprogram UB, Centre for Plant Biodiversity
Research, Australian National Botanic Gardens, Canberra
Brunkhorst DJ (1995) Sustaining nature and societyA bioregional approach, Inhabit, 3:5-9
Buchy M and Hoverman S (1999) Understanding Public Participation in Forest Planning in Australia: How Can We Learn From
Each Other?, Australian National University Forestry Occasional Paper 99.2, Canberra
Bui E (1997) Assessing the Regional Risk of Salinization Over the Dalrymple Shire, Technical Report 26/97, CSIRO, Canberra
Bui E, Smetten KJR and Williams J (1995) Assessing salinization risk in North Queensland using GIS and soil survey
information, Applications of GIS to the Modelling of Non-point Source Pollutants in the Vadose Zone, ASA-CSSA-SSSA
Bouyoucos Conference, Mission Inn, Riverside CA, May 1-3 1995
Bullen F (1993) Changing the vegetation, Reef Range and Red Dust. The Adventure Atlas of Queensland, D Wadley and W
King (eds), Queensland Government, Brisbane, pp. 210-212
Bulman P, Beale P and Knight A (1998) Growing Broombushfor Profit and Land Protection, Bulletin No. 1/98, Primary
Industries and Resources South Australia and LWRRDC, Canberra
Bunn SE (1993) Riparian stream linkages: Research needs for the protection of in-stream values, Australian Biologist,
6(1):46-51
Bunn SE, Pusey BJ and Price P (eds) (1993) Ecology and Management of Riparian Zones in Australia, LWRRDC Occasional
Paper Series No. 05/93, Canberra
Burkes Backyard Fact Sheet (2000) Blue Grass, <http://www.burkesbackyard.com.au>
Burrows WH (1990) Prospects for increased production in the north-east Australian beef industry through pasture
development and management, Agricultural Science, 3:19-24
Burrows WH (1993) Deforestation in the savanna context: problems and benefits for pastoralism, Proceedings of XVIIth
International Grassland Congress, pp. 2223-2230
Burrows WH (1995) Greenhouse revisitedan alternative viewpoint on land use change and forestry from a
Queensland perspective, Climate Change Newsletter, 7:6-7
139
Burrows W (1999) Tree clearingrehabilitation or development on grazing land?, People and Rangelands Building the
Future : Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland Congress, Townsville, 17-18th of July, International Rangeland
Congress, Townsville, pp. 742
Burrows WH, Beale IF, Silcock RG and Pressland AJ (1985) Prediction of tree and shrub population changes in a semi
arid woodland, Ecology and Management of the Worlds Savannas, JC Tothill and JJ Mott (eds), Australian Academy of
Science, Canberra, pp. 207-211
Burrows WH, Scanlan JC and Anderson ER (1988a) Plant ecological relationships in open forests, wodlands and
shrublands, Native Pastures in Queensland: The resources and their management, WF Burrows, Scanlan JC and Rutherford
MT (eds), Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane, pp. 72-90
Burrows WH, Scanlan JC and Rutherford MT (1988b) Native Pastures in Queensland: The resources and their management,
Queensland Department of Primary Industries Information Series QI87023, Brisbane
Burrows WH, Carter JO, Scanlan JC and Anderson ER (1990) Management of savannas for livestock production in
north-east Australia: contrasts across the tree-grass continuum, Journal of Biogeography, 17:503-512
Burrows WH, Compton JF and Hoffman MB (1998) Vegetation thickening and carbon sinks in the grazed woodlands of
north-east Australia, Plantation and Regrowth Forestry: a diversity of opportunity Australian Forest Growers Biennial
Conference Proceedings, R Dyason, L Dyason and R Garsden (eds), Australian Forest Growers, Lismore, New South Wales,
pp. 305-316
Cale PG and Hobbs RJ (1994) Landscape heterogeneity indices: problems of scale and applicability, with particular
reference to animal habitat description, Pacific Conservation Biology, 1(3):183-193
Callicott JB and K Mumford (1997) Ecological sustainability as a conservation concept, Conservation Biology, 11(1):32-40
Callicott JB, LB Crowder and K Mumford (1999) Current normative concepts in conservation, Conservation Biology,
13(1):22-35
Cameron DM (1990) Managing Woodlands for Grazing, Snippets, 3(2):7-15
Cameron J and Blick R (1991) Case Study 2: Pastoralism in the Queensland Mulga Lands, Recovering Ground: A case
study approach to ecological sustainable rural land management, JI Cameron and J Elix (eds), Australian Conservation
Foundation, Melbourne, pp. 75-116
Cameron DM, Rance SJ, Jones RM, Charles-Edwards DA and Barnes A (1989) Project STAG: An experimental study in
agroforestry, Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 40: 699-714
Campbell I (1993) Riparian stream linkages: An Australian perspective on in-stream issues, Ecology and Management of
Riparian Zones in Australia. Proceedings of a National Workshop on Research and Management Needs for Riparian Zones in
Australia, Marcoola, Sunshine Coast, Southeast Queensland, April 13 to 14, 1993, S Bunn, B Pusey and P Price (eds)
Occasional Paper No 05/93, LWRRDC, Canberra, pp. 5-20
Campbell BM, Swift MJ, Hatton J and Forest PGH (1988) Small-scale vegetation pattern and nutrient cycling in Miombo
woodland, Vegetation Structure in Relation to Carbon and Nutrient Economy, JTA Verhoweven, GW Heil and MJA Werger
(eds), Academic Press, The Hague, pp. 69-85
Carberry PS, Meinke H, Pulton P, Hargreaves JNGH, Snell AJ and Sudmeyer RA (in press) Modelling crop growth and
yield under the environmental changes induced by windbreaks 2. Simulation of potential benefits at selected sites in
Australia, Agroforestry Systems
Carr D and Jenkins B (2000) Examining the compromises inherent in obtaining multiple benefits from revegetation,
Proceedings of 2nd Managing and Growing Trees Training Conference, October 1998, Department of Natural Resources,
Queensland
Carson R (1962) Silent Spring, Houghton-Mifflen, Boston, USA
Catterall CP (1993) The importance of riparian zones to terrestrial wildlife, Ecology and Management of Riparian Zones
in Australia, SE Bunn, BJ Pusey and P Price (eds), LWRRDC Occasional Paper Series No:05/93, pp. 41-52
Catterall CP and Kingston M (1993) Remnant Bushland in South-East Queensland in the 1990s: Its Distribution, Loss
Ecological Consequences and Future Prospects, Institute of Applied Environmental Research, Griffith University and
Brisbane City Council, Nathan, Queensland
Catterall CP, Green RJ and Jones DN (1991) Habitat use by birds across a forest-suburb interface in Brisbane:
implications for corridors, Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridor, DA Saunders and R Hobbs (eds), Surrey Beatty
and Sons, Perth, pp. 247-258
Catterall CP, Kingston M, Park K and Sewell S (1992) Critical habitat of migratory birds in the lowlands of southeast
Queensland, Proceedings 1992 Australian Wildlife Management Society Conference.
Catterall CP, Kingston MB, Park K and Sewell S (1998) Deforestation, urbanization and seasonality: interacting effects
on a bird assemblage, Biological Conservation, 84(1):65-81
CASTCentre for Agricultural Science and Technology (1999) Benefits of Biodiversity, Taskforce report, No. 133, Council
for Agricultural Science and Technology, USA
CDLAPSCCoorong and Districts Local Action Plan Steering Committee (1997) Coorong & Districts local Action Plan:
Protecting Agriculture And Natural Resources (Draft), Coorong and Districts Local Action Plan Steering Committee,
Coomandook
140
Chambers SD (1998) Short- and Long-Term Effects of Clearing Native Vegetation for Agricultural Purposes, PhD Thesis, School
of Earth Sciences, The Flinders University of South Australia
Cheal DC (1993) Effects of stock grazing on the plants of semi-arid woodlands and grasslands, Proceedings of the Royal
Society of Victoria, 105:57-65
Chenoweth and Associates (1994) Fauna Corridor Planning Guidelines, Report prepared for Queensland Department of
Environment and Heritage and Queensland Department of Housing, Local Government and Planning, Brisbane,
unpublished
Chilcott C (2000) The Initial Impacts of Reforestation and Deforestation on Herbaceous Species, Litter Decomposition, Soil Biota
and Nutrients in Native Temperate Pastures on the Northern Tablelands, PhD Thesis, University of New England, Armidale
NSW
Chilcott C (in prep). The effect of strip blade ploughing on soil chemical and biological conditions in southern Queensland
grazing lands
Chilcott C, Reid NCH and King K (1997) Impact of trees on the diversity of pasture species and soil biota in grazed
landscapes in Northern Tablelands, NSW, Conservation Outside Nature Reserves, P Hale and D Lamb (eds), Centre for
Conservation Biology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, pp. 378-386
Christie EK (1975) A note on the significance of Eucalyptus populnea for buffel grass production in infertile semi-arid
rangelands, Tropical Grasslands, 9:243-246
Christie EK (1993) Ecosystem change and land degradation, Land Degradation Processes in Australia, G McTainsh and
WC Boughton (eds), Longman Cheshire, Melbourne, pp. 307-342
Christopher N, Melillo JM, Steudler PA, Cerri CC, de Moraes JFL, Piccolo MC, Brito M (1997) Soil carbon and nitrogen
stocks following forest clearing for pasture in the south-western Brazilian Amazon, Ecological Applications, 7:1216-1225
CIE (1997) A Plan to Achieve the Plantations 2020 VisionFinal Report, Centre for International Economics, Canberra
CIE (1999) Midterm Review of the Natural Heritage TrustBushcare program, Centre for International Economics, Canberra
Ciesiolka C (1987) Catchment management in the Nogoa watershed, Australian Water Resources Commission Research
Project 80/128, Department of Resources and Energy, Canberra
Clark CJ, Mauger GW, Bell RW and Hobbs RJ (1998) Computer modelling of the effect of revegetation strategies on
salinity in western wheatbelt of Western Australia, 1: impact of revegetation strategies, Australian Journal of Soil
Research, 36(1):109-129
Clough BF (1992) Primary productivity and growth of mangrove forests, Tropical Mangrove Ecosystems, AI Robertson
and DM Alongi (eds), American Geophysical Union, Washington DC, pp. 225-249
Coates DB, Miller CP, Hendricksen RE, Jones RJ (1997) Stability and productivity of Stylosanthes pastures in Australia,
2: animal production from Stylosanthes pastures, Tropical Grasslands, 11:494-502
Cohen T (1999) Channel recovery mechanisms in a forested catchment, jones creek, east gippsland; lessons for river
management in southeastern Australia, Proceedings, Second Australian Stream Management Conference, 8-11 February,
Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 181-186
Collinge SK (1996). Ecological consequences of habitat fragmentation: implications for landscape architecture and
planning, Landscape and Urban Planning, 36:59-77
Commonwealth of Australia (1992a) National Forestry Policy StatementA new focus for Australias forests, AGPS, Canberra
Commonwealth of Australia (1992b) National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development, AGPS, Canberra
Commonwealth of Australia (1993) Biodiversity and its value, Biodiversity Series Paper No. 1, Department of
Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, pp. 1-28
Commonwealth of Australia (1996) National Strategy for the Conservation of Australias Biological Diversity, AGPS, Canberra
Commonwealth of Australia (1997) The National Weeds Strategy: A strategic approach to weed problems of national
significance, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra
Commonwealth of Australia (1999) An overview of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, Environment
Australia, Canberra
Commonwealth of Australia (2000) National Framework for the Management and Monitoring of Australias Native Vegetation,
Department of Environment and Heritage, Canberra
Conacher, A. and Conacher J (1995) Rural Land Degradation in Australia, Oxford University Press, Melbourne
Connor EF and McCoy ED (1979) The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship, The American Naturalist,
113:791-833
Constanza R and Daly HE (1992) Natural capital and sustainable development, Conservation Biology, 6(1):37-46
Costanza R, dArge R, De Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, ONeill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin
RG, Sutton P and Van Den Belt M (1997) The value of the worlds ecosystem services and natural capita, Nature, 387:
253-260
Cook E and van Lier H (1994) Landscape planning and ecological networks: An introduction, Landscape Planning and
Ecological Networks, EA Cook and H van Lier (eds), Elsevier Science, The Netherlands
Cook BG and Grimes RF (1977) Multiple land use of open forest in south-eastern Queensland for timber and improved
pasture: Establishment and early growth, Tropical Grasslands, 11:239-246
Cook SJ and Ratliff D (1997) Effect of tree clearing and seedbeds on the establishment, growth and population
dynamics of siratro, green panic and signal grass oversown into a speargrass pasture in south-east Queensland,
Tropical Grasslands, 26:171-180
141
Coram JE, Dyson PR, Houlder PA and Evans WR (2000) Australian Groundwater Flow Systems contributing to Dryland
Salinity, National Land and Water Resources Audit, Canberra
Cregan P and Scott B (1998) Soil acidification-an agricultural and environmental problem, Agriculture and the
Environmental Imperative, J Pratley and A Roberts (eds), CSIRO Publishing, Victoria, pp. 98-128
Croft M, Goldney D and Cardale S (1997) Forest and woodland cover in the central western region of New South Wales
prior to European settlement, Conservation Outside Nature Reserves, P Hale and D Lamb (eds), Centre for Conservation
Biology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 394-406
Crome F, Isaacs JK and Moore L (1994) The utility to birds and mammals of remnant riparian vegetation and
associated windbreaks in the tropical Queensland uplands, Pacific Conservation Biology, 1(4):328-343
CSIRO (1999) The Salinity Audit of the MurrayDarling Basin, CSIRO, Canberra
Daily GC (1997) Introduction: what are ecosystem services?, Natures Services: Societal Dependence on Natural
Ecosystems, GC Daily (ed), Island Press, Washington DC, pp. 1-10
Daily GC, Matson PA and Vitousek PM (1997) Ecosystem services supplied by soil, Natures Services: Societal
Dependence on Natural Ecosystems, GC Daily (ed), Island Press, Washington DC, pp. 113-132
Dalal RC and Mayer RJ (1996) Long term trends in fertility of soil continuous cultivation and cereal cropping in
southern Queensland. 1. Overall Changes in soil properties and trends in winter cereal yields, Australian Journal of Soil
Research, 24:265-279
Dale A and Bellamy J (1998) Regional Resource Use and Planning in Rangelands: an Australian Review, Land and Water
Resources Research and Development Corporation, Occasional Paper No. 06/98, Canberra
Dale AP and Cowell S (1999) Planning systems theory: Building better systems of regional planning for sustainable
natural resource use, Paper presented to International Symposium for Sustainable Natural Resource Management, Brisbane,
July 1999, unpublished
Dallmeier F and Comiskey JA (1998) Forest biodiversity assessment, monitoring, and evaluation for adaptive
management, Forest Biodiversity Research, Monitoring and Modelling, F Dallmeier and JA Comiskey (eds.), UNESCO, Paris
and The Parthenon Publishing Group, New York, pp. 3-15
Daly JJ (1984) Cattle need shade trees, Queensland Journal of Agriculture, 10(1):21
Danaher T, Carter JO, Brook KD and Dudgeon G (1992) Broadscale vegetation mapping using NOAA AVHRR imagery
Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Remote Sensing Conference, November 1992, Wellington, NZ, 3: 128-137
Daniells IG, Larsen DL, McKenzie DC and Anthony DTW (1996) SOILpak: a successful decision support system for managing
the structure of Vertisols under irrigated cotton, NSW Agriculture, Orange, New South Wales
Daubernmire R (1968) Ecology of fire in Grasslands, Advances in Ecological Research, 5:209-66
Davidson R and Davidson S (1992) Bushland on Farms: Do you have a choice?, AGPS, Canberra
Davidson EM and Tay CS (1983) Twig, branch and upper trunk cankers of Eucalyptus marginata, Plant Disease,
67:1285-87
Davies PM and Bunn SE (1999) Restoring fundamental ecological processes in small, forested upland streams: The
importance of riparian vegetation, Proceedings, Second Australian Stream Management Conference, 8-11 February, Adelaide,
South Australia, pp. 193-198
Davies PM and Lane JAK (1995) Guidelines for design of effective buffers for wetlands on the Swan coastal plain, Unpublished
report to the Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra
Dawson TE and Fry R (1998) Agriculture in natures image, Agriculture as a Mimic of Natural Ecosystems, Workshop
report for the RIRDC/LWRRDC/FWPRDC Joint Venture Agroforestry Program, Williams, Western Australia, EC Lefroy and RJ
Hobbs (eds), RIRDC Publication No 98/66, Canberra, pp. 19-22
De Barro PJ (1992) The impact of spiders on cereal aphid (Rhopalosiphum padi) numbers in an irrigated perennial grass
pasture in South Australia, Annals of Applied Biology, 121:19-26
De Corte M, Cannon M, Barry E, Bright M and Scanlan J (1991) Land degradation in the Dalrymple Shire: a preliminary
assessment, Department of Primary Industries, National Soil Conservation Program, CSIRO, Townsville
DEST-Department of Environment, Sport and Territories (1996) Australia State of the Environment, CSIRO Publishing,
Victoria
Department of Land and Water Conservation New South Wales (1995) Rural Production and Native Vegetation Landholders
Information Package, New South Wales Department of Land and Water Conservation, New South Wales
Department of Public Lands (1926) Practical Working of the Land Laws: Manual for the Guidance of District Officers of the
Department of Public Lands, Government Printer, Brisbane
Diamond J (1998) Guns, Germs and Steel: A short history of everybody in the last 13,000 years, Vintage, Random House,
London
Dickman CR, Pressey RL, Lim L and Parnaby HE (1993) Mammals of particular conservation concern in western New
South Wales, Biological Conservation, 65(3):219-48
Didham RK (1997) The influence of edge effects and forest fragmentation on leaf litter invertebrates in Central
Amazonia, Tropical Forest Remnants, WF Laurance and RO Bierregaard (eds), University of Chicago Press, Chicago,
pp. 55-70
142
Dilshad M and Jonauskas PE (1992) Impact of land use on agricultural hydrology in the Northern Territory semi arid
tropics. Workshop papers Erosion/productivity and Erosion Prediction, Proceedings of 5th Australian Soil Conservation
Conference, Perth, Western Australia, pp. 104-107
DNRDepartment of Natural Resources (1997) Queensland Decade of Landcare Plan, Priority Actions 19972000,
Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane
DNRDepartment of Natural Resources (1998a) A Guide to Land Tenure in Queensland, Department of Natural Resources,
Queensland
DNRDepartment of Natural Resources (1998b) Environmental flow requirements, Technical Report 4, Fitzroy Basin
Water Allocation and Management Planning: Technical Reports, Queensland Government, Brisbane
DNR-Department of Natural Resources (1999a) Land Cover Change in Queensland 1991-1995: A Statewide Landcover and
Trees Study (SLATS) Report, July 1999, Department of Natural Resources, Indooroopilly
DNR-Department of Natural Resources (1999b) Land Cover Change in Queensland 1995-97, A Statewide Landcover and
Trees Study Report (SLATS), August 1999, Department of Natural Resources, Indooroopilly
DNR-Department of Natural Resources (1999c) Code of Practice for Native Forest timber Production, Forest Allocation and
Use, Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane
DNR-Department of Natural Resources (1999d) Natural Resources Monitoring Guide, Scientific Publishing, Department of
Natural Resources, Queensland
DNR-Department of Natural Resources (1999e) Guidelines for Developing Regional Strategies, Scientific Publishing,
Department of Natural Resources, Queensland
DNR-Department of Natural Resources (2000) Fauna and Flora Information System, Controlled Document, Queensland
Government
Dore J and Woodhill J (1999) Sustainable Regional Development: Executive Summary of the Final Report, Greening Australia,
Canberra
Dorit RL, Walker WF and Barnes RD (1991) Zoology, Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia
Dorricott K, Lawrie B and Voller P (1997) Balancing productivity and conservation in southern inland Queensland: A
case study at the grass-roots, Conservation Outside Nature Reserves, P Hale and D Lamb (eds), Centre for Conservation
Biology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 233-240
Dorricott KE, Voller PJ and Laurie BC (1998) Balancing Production with Nature Conservation: case studies from southern inland
Queensland, Queensland Department of Environment, Brisbane
Dove JJ (1997) Sustainability Indicators for Agriculture. Introductory Guide to Regional/National Indicators and On-farm
Indicators, RIRDC Publication No. 97/72, Canberra
Dovers SR and TW Norton (1994a) Towards an ecological framework for sustainability: considerations for ecosystem
management, Pacific Conservation Biology, 1(4): 283-293
Dovers and Norton (1994b) Sustainability: questions for ecosystem management, Ecology and Sustainability of Southern
Temperate Ecosystems, SR Dovers and TW Norton (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne
Dowling RM and McDonald TJ (1982) Mangrove communities of Queensland, Mangrove Systems in Australia: Structure,
function and management, BF Clough (ed), Australian Institute of Marine Science and Australian National University
Press, Canberra
Dowling AJ, Webb AA and Scanlan JC (1986) Surface soil chemical and physical properties in a brigalowDawson gum
forest, central Queensland, Australian Journal of Ecology, 11:155-162
Downes SJ, Handasyde KA and Elgar MA (1997) The use of corridors by mammals in fragmented Australian eucalypt
forests, Conservation Biology, 5(3):718-726
Doyle C, Nanson GC and Perrens S (1999) A geomorphic study into the effect and remedies of European influences on
the Nambucca River Catchment: Lessons for gravel-bed river management in coastal southeastern Australia,
Proceedings, Second Australian Stream Management Conference, 8-11 February, Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 219-224
DPIDepartment of Primary Industries (1976) Brigalow Farm Management Handbook. Advisory Leaflet No. 40, Department
of Primary Industries, Brisbane
DPI Department of Primary Industries (1998) An Overview of the Queensland Forest Industry, Department of Primary
Industries, Queensland
DPI-Department of Primary Industries (forthcoming) Queensland Beef On-Farm Situation AnalysisAn On Farm Profile, draft
report for the Queensland Beef Industry Institute, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland
DPIE (1998a) Australias ForestsThe Path to Sustainability, Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Environment
Australia, Canberra
Dumsday RG and Oram DA (1990) Economics of dryland salinity control in the Murray River Basin, northern Victoria
(Australia), Dryland Management: Economic Case Studies, JA Dixon, DE James and PB Sherman (eds), Earthscan, London
Dunn T and Gray I (1978) Economic Evaluation of Eppalock Catchment Soil Conservation Project, Victoria, AGPS Canberra
Dupont GV (1998) The Effects of Trees on Microclimate Along a Rainfall Gradient In South-Queensland, Master of Agricultural
Science thesis, Department of Botany, University of Queensland
East RM and Felker P (1993) Forage production and quality of four perennial grasses grown under and outside
canopies of mature Prosopis glandulosa Torr. var glandulosa (mesquite), Agroforestry Systems, 22:91-101
143
Eastham J and Rose CW (1988) Pasture evapotranspiration under varying tree planting density in an agroforestry
experiment, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 42:355-368
Eastham J and Rose CW (1990) Tree/pasture interactions at a range of tree densities in an agroforestry experiment I.
Rooting patterns, Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 41:683-695
Eastham J, Rose CW, Cameron DM, Rance SJ and Talsma T (1988) The effect of tree spacing on evaporation from an
agroforestry experiment, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 42:355-368
Eastham J, Rose CW, Cameron DM, Rance SJ, Talsma T and Charles-Edwards DA (1990a) Tree/pasture interactions at
a range of tree densities in an agroforestry experiment II. Water uptake in relation to rooting patterns, Australian Journal
of Agricultural Research, 41:697-707
Eastham J, Rose CW, Cameron DM, Rance SJ, Talsma T and Charles-Edwards DA (1990b) Tree/pasture interactions at
a range of tree densities in an agroforestry experiment III. Water uptake in relation to soil hydraulic conductivity and
rooting patterns, Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 41:707-718
Ebersohn JP and Lucas P (1965) Trees and soil nutrients in south western Queensland, Queensland Journal of
Agricultural and Animal Sciences, 22:431-435
Ecological Sustainable Development Working Party on Biological Diversity (1991), The Conservation of Biodiversity as it
Relates to Ecological Sustainable Development, Report of the Ecologically Sustainable Development Working party on
Biological Diversity, Canberra
Ellis M and Wilson P (1992) An overview of the vertebrate fauna of the brigalow belt north east Bourke, New South Wales,
Unpublished report to Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra
Ellstrand NC (1992) Gene flow by pollen: implications for plant conservation genetics, Oikos, 63:77-86
EPA-Environmental Protection Authority (1999a) Wetlands of South-western Queensland, Reprinted from R.P. Jaensch,
The Status and Importance of Queenslands South-western Wetlands, Unpublished report by Wetlands International
Oceania to the Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane
EPA-Environmental Protection Authority (1999b) Queenslands Coast: Managing its future. A position paper on coastal
management in Queensland, Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane
EPA-Environmental Protection Authority (1999c) State of the Environment Queensland 1999, Environmental Protection
Authority, Queensland
EPA-Environmental Protection Authority (1999d) Strategy for the Conservation and Management of Queenslands Wetlands,
Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane
Ewel JJ (1986) Designing agricultural systems for the humid tropics, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics,
17:245271
Ewel JJ, Mazzarino MJ and Berish CW (1991) Tropical soil fertility changes under monocultures and successional
communities of different structure, Ecological Applications, 1(3):289302
Fairbairn E (1999) Western Queensland Trees and Their Timbers. Australian Timbers Vol 2, Department of Natural Resources,
Queensland
Fairbairn E (2000) Promoting the use of outback timbers to improve ecological and socioeconomic outcomes,
Proceedings of 2nd Managing and Growing Trees Training Conference, October 1998, Department of Natural Resources,
Queensland
Fairfax RJ and Fensham RJ (2000) The effects of exotic pasture development on floristic diversity in central
Queensland, Biological Conservation, 94(1):11-24
Fensham RJ (1995) Floristics and environmental relations of inland dry rainforest in north Queensland, Australia,
Journal of Biogeography, 22:1047-1063
Fensham RJ (1998a) Resolving biomass fluxes in Queensland woodlands, Climate Change Newsletter, 10(2):13-15
Fensham RJ (1998b) The grassy vegetation of the Darling Downs, south-eastern Queensland, Australia. Floristics and
grazing effects, Biological Conservation, 84:301-310
Fensham, RJ and Holman JE (1998) The use of the land survey record to assess change in vegetation structure. A case
study from the Darling Downs, Queensland, Australia, Rangeland Journal, 20:132-142
Fensham, RJ and Holman JE (1999) Temporal and spatial patterns in drought-related tree dieback in Australian
savanna, Journal of Applied Ecology, 36:1035-1050
Fensham RJ and Skull SD (1999) Before cattle: a comparative floristic study of grassy Eucalyptus woodland grazed by
macropods and cattle in north Queensland, Australia, Biotropica, 31:32-42
Fensham RJ, McCosker JC, Cox MJ (1998) Estimating clearance of Acacia-dominated ecosystems in central Queensland
using land-system mapping data, Australian Journal of Botany, 46:305-319
FERA (1998) Old growth forest in Southeast Queensland, Sustainable Forest Management Technical Report 1998/01,
Department of Natural Resources, Queensland
Ferrier S and Watson G (1997) An Evaluation Of The Effectiveness of Environmental Surrogates and Modelling Techniques in
Predicting the Distribution of Biological Diversity, Consultancy report prepared for Environment Australia, Environment
Australia, Canberra
144
Firth D, Wells K, Wood N and Walker P (1984) Priorities For Tree Establishment: Areas of High Tree Loss, Salinity and Soil
Erosion, Department of Home Affairs and Environment, Environment Division, Canberra
Fisher DE and Walton M (1996) Environmental Law Queensland, LBC Information Services, New South Wales
Fisher MJ and Skerman PJ (1986) Salt tolerant forage plants for summer rainfall areas, Reclamation and Revegetation
Research, 5:263-284
Flannery TF (1994) The Future Eaters: An ecological history of the Australasian lands and people, Reed Books, Chatswood
Fleischner TL (1994) Ecological costs of livestock grazing in Western North America, Conservation Biology, 8:629-644
Flower P, Hamley T, Smith GC, Corben C, Hobcroft D and Kehl J (1995) The Black-breasted Button-quail Turnix
melanogaster (Gould) in Queensland, Queensland Forestry Research Institute, Unpublished Report
Flynn M (2000) Native Foods: Creating Markets, Qld Country Life
Foran BD (1980) Changes in range condition with distance from watering point and its implications for field survey,
Australian Rangeland Journal, 2:59-66
Foran BD, Friedel MH, MacLeod DM, Stafford-Smith M and Wilson AD (1990) A Policy for the Future of Australias
Rangelands, CSIRO, Canberra
Ford H (1986) Birds and eucalypt dieback in north-eastern New South Wales, The Dynamic Partnership: Birds and Plants
in Southern Australia, HA Ford, RC Paton and DJ Wooman (eds) Government Printer, South Australia, pp. 150-154
Ford HA (1990) The bird community in eucalypt woodland and eucalypt dieback in the northern tablelands of new
South Wales, Birds of Eucalypt Forests and Woodlands: Ecology, Conservation, Management, A Keast, HF Recher, H Ford and
D. Saunders (eds), Royal Australian Ornithologists Union and Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton
Ford GW, Martin JJ, Rengasamy P, Boucher SC and Ellingtonn A (1993) Soil sodicity in Victoria, Australian Journal of
Soil Research, 31(6):869-909
Forest Facts (2000) Value-adding in WA Forests, CALM, Western Australia
Forge K (1997) GRASS CheckGrazier Rangeland Assessment for Self-Sustainability 2nd Edition, Department of Natural
Resources, Queensland, DNRQ97002
Forman RTT and Godron M (1986) Landscape Ecology, John Wiley and Sons, New York
Fortech (1997) Review Of Sustainable Forest Management Certification And Labelling, Report to The Standing Committee on
Forestry, Forestry Technical Services Ltd in association with Price Waterhouse and Timber Merchants Association
(Victoria), Acton, Canberra
Fox MD (1999) Present environmental influences on the Australian flora, Flora of Australia Volume 1 Introduction (2nd
edn), AE Orchard (ed), ABRS/CSIRO, Australia, pp. 205-49
Frakes LA (1999) Evolution of Australian environments, Flora of Australia Volume 1 Introduction (2nd ed), AE Orchard
(ed), ABRS/CSIRO Australia, pp. 163-203
Francis P (2000) The opportunities for farm forestry and vegetation management in the new millennium, Keynote
address: Proceedings of 2nd Managing and Growing Trees Training Conference, 19-21 October 1998, Department of Natural
Resources, Queensland, in press
Franklin DC (in press) Evidence of disarray amongst granivourous bird assemblages in the savanna of northern
Australia, a region of sparse human settlement, Biological Conservation
Franks AJ, Fairfax RJ and Butler DW (2000) A weed by any other name, Wildlife Australia, 37:24
Frawley KJ (1983) A History of Forest and Land Management in Queensland, with Particular Reference to the North Queensland
Rainforest: A report to the Rainforest Conservation Society of Queensland, unpublished, Queensland
Fray P (1991) On fertile ground? The sustainable agriculture debate, Habitat Australia, 19(2):4-8
Freebairn DM, Wockner GH and Silburn DM (1986) Effects of catchment management on runoff, water quality and
yield potential from vertisols, Agricultural Water Management, 12:1-19
Friedel MH and James CD (1995) How does grazing of native pastures affect their biodiversity?, Conserving Biodiversity:
Threats and Solutions, RA Bradstock, TD Auld, DA Keith, RT Kingsford, D Lunney and DP Silversten (eds), Surrey Beatty
and Sons Pty Ltd, Chipping Norton, Australia, pp. 249-259
Frost T (1985) Organic matter and nutrient dynamics in a broadleafed African savanna, Ecology and Management of the
Worlds Savannas, JC Tothill and JJ Mott (eds), Australian Academy of Science, Canberra, pp. 200-206
Furze B, DeLacy T and Birckhead J (1996) Culture, Conservation and Biodiversity: the Social Dimension of Linking Local Level
Development and Conservation through Protected Areas, John Wiley, Chichester, England
Greening Australia (1996) Farm Forestry in Australia: Integrating Commercial and Conservation Benefits, Greening Australia
Ltd, Canberra
Gall J and Davidson S (1981) Eucalypt dieback. Symptom of an ailing ecosystem, Habitat, 9(1):1921
Galloway RW (1982) Distribution and physiographic patterns of Australian mangroves, Mangrove Ecosystems in
Australia, Structure, Function and Management, BF Clough (ed), Australian Institute of Marine Science and Australian
National University Press, Canberra, pp. 31-54.
Gardener CJ, McIvor JG and Williams J (1990) Dry tropical rangelands: solving one problem and creating another,
Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia, 16:279-286
Garnett S (ed) (1992) Threatened and Extinct Birds of Australia, Report No. 8. RAOU and ANPWS, Royal Australian
Ornithologists Union, Melbourne
145
George RJ, Nulsen RA, Ferdowsian R and Raper GP (1999) Interactions between trees and groundwaters in recharge
and discharge areas-a survey of Western Australian sites, Agricultural Water Management, 39:91-113
Georgiadis NJ (1989) Microhabitat variation in an African savanna: effect of woody cover and herbivores in Kenya,
Journal of Tropical Ecology, 5:93-108
Gill AM (1975) Fire and the Australian biota: A review, Australian Forestry, 38 (1):4-25
Gillard P (1979) Improvement of native pasture with Townsville stylo in the dry tropics of sub-coastal northern
Queensland, Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry, 19:325-336
Gillard P, Williams J and Moneypenny R (1989) Tree clearing in the semi-arid tropics, Agricultural Science, 2:34-39
Gillman GP (1976) Red Basaltic Soils in North Queensland. II. Chemistry, Technical Paper No 28, CSIRO Division of Soils,
Canberra
Glanznig A (1995) Native Vegetation Clearance, Habitat Loss and Biodiversity Decline: An Overview Of Recent Native Vegetation
Clearance in Australia and its Implications for Biodiversity, Biodiversity Series, paper No 6, Biodiversity Unit, Department of
Environment, Sport, and Territories, Canberra
Goldney D and Watson G (1995) Marketing and social issues relevant to landholders management of native
vegetation, R&D On Socio-Economic Aspects of Maintaining Native Vegetation on Agricultural Land, Proceedings of a national
workshop and associated papers, P Price (ed), Land and Water Research and Development Corporation Occasional Paper
Series No 07/95, LWRRDC, Canberra, pp. 22-24
Goosem M and Marsh H (1997) Fragmentation of a small-mammal community by a powerline corridor through
tropical rainforest, Wildlife Research, 24:613-629
Goosem S and Tucker N (1995) Repairing the Rainforest: Theory And Practice of Rainforest Re-Establishment in North
Queenslands Wet Tropics, Wet Tropics Management Authority and Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage,
Cairns
Gordon IJ (ed) (1991) A Survey of Dryland and Irrigation Salinity in Queensland, Queensland Department of Primary
Industries, Brisbane
Gordon IJ (1998) Salinity and sodicity, Determining Sustainable Soil Management for the 21st Century. Final Report,
P Truong and N Diatloff (eds), Resource Sciences Centre, Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane,
pp. 126-143
Gordon IJ and Claridge J (1997) The Potential for Salinity or Waterlogging Problems with Irrigation Development in the Upper
Dawson River Catchment, Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane
Graetz RD (1998) The Terrestrial Carbon Pools of the Australian Continent: An Assessment of their Size, Dynamics and
Tractability, National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report to Department of Environment Sport and Territories, Canberra
Graham TWG (1978) Soil Nitrogen Status in Relation to Land Development and Pasture Productivity in the Brigalow Region of
Central Queensland, M. Agric Sc Thesis, University of Queensland, Brisbane
Graham C and Hart D (1998) Bushfoods, The New Rural Industries: A Handbook for Farmers and Investors, K Hyde (ed),
Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, pp. 225-234
Graham TWG, Webb AA and Waring SA (1981) Soil nitrogen status and pasture productivity after clearing of brigalow
(Acacia harpophylla), Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandary, 21:109-118
Gramshaw D (1995) Integrated Management for Sustainable Forage-based Livestock Systems in the Tropics, Occasional
Publication No. 6., Tropical Grassland Society of Australia, Brisbane
Gramshaw D and Lloyd D (1993) Grazing the North, Queensland, Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Gray I and Lawrence G (forthcoming) Global Misfortune: Regional Australia in the New Millennium, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge
Gregory B and Pressey B (1982) River improvement, Wildlife in Australia, 19(2):52-55
Gregory SV, Swanson FJ, McKee WA and Cummins KW (1991) An ecosystem perspective of riparian zones, Bioscience,
41(8):540-551
Greig PJ and Devonshire PG (1981) Tree removals on saline seepage in Victorian catchments: some hydrologic and
economic results, Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 25(2):134-148
Gretton P and Selma U (1996) Land Degradation and the Australian Agricultural Industry, Industry Commission Staff
Information Paper, AGPS, Canberra
Grice AC (1997) Post fire regrowth and survival of the invasive tropical shrubs Cryptostegia grandiflora and Ziziphus
mauritiana, Australian Journal of Ecology, 22:49-55
Griffin nrm P/L (1999) Native Vegetation National Overview, Report for ANZECC, Environment Australia, Canberra
Groves RH (1999) Present vegetation types, Flora of Australia (2nd ed) Volume 1 Introduction, AE Orchard (ed),
ABRS/CSIRO, Australia
Hacker JB, Shaw NH and (t Mannetje L (1982) More Beef From Spear Grass Country, CSIRO Division of Tropical Crops and
Pastures Research Report No. 2, CSIRO, Brisbane
Hall WB, McKeon GM, Carter JO, Day KA, Howden SM, Scanlan JC, Johnston PW and Burrows WH (1998) Climate
change in Queenslands grazing lands: II An assessment of the impact on animal production from native pastures,
Rangeland Journal, 20(2):177-205
146
Hamilton LS and Snedaker SC (1984) Handbook for Mangrove Area Management, IUCN, Switzerland
Hancock CN, Ladd PG and Froend RH (1996) Biodiversity and management of riparian vegetation in western
Australia, Forest Ecology and Management, 85:239-250
Hanski I, Pakkala T, Kuussaari M and Guangchun L (1995) Metapopulation persistence of an endangered butterfly in a
fragmented landscape, Oikos, 72:21-28.
Harland R (ed) (1993) Managing for Woody Weed Control in Western NSW, NSW Agriculture, Dubbo
Harrington, G.N. (1979) The effects of feral goats and sheep on the shrub populations in a semi-arid woodland,
Australian Rangeland Journal, 1:334-45
Harrington GN (1990) The influence of agriculture on native vegetation types and vertebrate animals in North
Queensland, Agriculture and the Ecosystem. Proceedings of a Symposium on Agriculture and the Ecosystem in North
Queensland, HM Hunter (ed), AIAS Occasional Publication No. 51, pp.45-55
Harrington GN (1993) Deforestation, Grasslands of our World, MJ Baker (ed), SIR Publishing, Wellington
Harrington GN, Mills DMD, Pressland AJ and Hodgkinson KC (1984a) Semi-arid woodlands, Management of Australias
Rangelands, Harrington GN, Wilson AD and Young MD (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 189-207
Harrington, G.N., Friedel, M.H., Hodgkinson, K.C. and Noble, J.C. (1984b) Vegetation ecology and management,
Management of Australias Rangelands, Harrington GN, Wilson AD, Young MD, (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 189-207
Harris LD (1984) The Fragmented Forest: Island Biogeography Theory and the Preservation of Biotic Diversity, University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Harris LD and Scheck J (1991) From implications to applications I-the physical dispersals corridor principal applied to
the conservation of biological diversity, Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridors, DA Saunders and R Hobbs (eds),
Surrey Beatty and Sons, pp. 190-203
Harrison S, Eono J, Herbohn J and Promod S (1997) Attitudes to tree planting and assistance schemes by Queensland
landholders, Proceedings of the 1st Managing and Growing Trees Training Conference, October 1996, Grodecki A, Aitchinson
J and Grimbeek P (eds), Department of Natural Resources, Queensland, pp. 127-136
Hayes G (1997) An Assessment of the National Dryland Salinity Research, Occasional Paper 16/97, Development and
Extension Program, Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
Hector A, Schmid B, Beierkuhnlein C, Caldeira MC, Diemer M, Dimitrakopoulos PG, Finn JA, Freitas H, Giller PS, Good J,
Harris R, Hgberg P, Huss-Danell K, Joshi J, Jumpponen A, Krner C, Leadley PW, Loreau M, Minns A, Mulder CPH,
ODonovan G, Otway SJ, Pereira JS, Prinz A, Read DJ, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Schulze ED, Siamantziouras ASD, Spehn EM,
Terry AC, Troumbis AY, Woodward FI, Yachi S and Lawton JH (1999) Plant diversity and production experiments in
European grasslands, Science, 286:1123-1127
Hendricksen RE, Rickert KG, Ash AJ and McKeon GM (1982) Beef production model, Proceedings of the Australian
Society of Animal Production, 14:204-208
Hepburn SJ (1998) Principles of Property Law, Cavendish Publishing, Avalon, New South Wales
Hill CJ (1995) An assessment of the function of linear strips of rainforest vegetation as dispersal corridors for selected
taxa of rainforest insects, Conservation Biology, 9:1559-66
Hill CJ (1997) Conservation corridors and rainforest insects, Forests and Insects, AD Watt, NE Stork and MD Hunter
(eds), Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 381-93
Hillman TJ (1997) Billabongs: Managemant issues for floodplain wetlands, Wetlands in a Dry Land: Understanding for
Management, WD Williams (ed), Environment Australia, Biodiversity Group, Canberra, pp. 41-48
Hobbs RJ (1987) Disturbance regimes in remnants of natural vegetation, Nature Conservation: The role of remnants of
native vegetation, DA Saunders, GW Arnold, AA Burbridge and AJM Hopkins (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons in association
with CSIRO and CALM, Sydney, pp. 103-121
Hobbs RJ (1991) Reintegrating fragmented landscapesa proposed framework for the Western Australian wheatbelt,
Retention and Replacement of Vegetation Workshop, Proceedings of the 5th Soil Conservation Conference, Perth, GJ Hamilton, KM
Howes, R Attwater (eds), Department of Agriculture, Western Australia
Hobbs R (1993a) Can revegetation assist in the conservation of biodiversity in agricultural areas?, Pacific Conservation
Biology, 1:29-38
Hobbs RJ (1993b) Effects of landscape fragmentation on ecosystem processes in the Western Australian wheatbelt,
Biological Conservation, 64:193-201
Hobbs RJ and Hopkins AJM (1990) From frontier to fragments: European impact on Australias vegetation, Proceedings
of the Ecological Society of Australia, 16:93-114
Hobbs RJ and Norton DA (1996) Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology, Restoration Ecology, 4:93-110
Hobbs RJ and Saunders DA (1991) Re-integrating fragmented landscapesa preliminary framework for the Western
Australian wheatbelt, Journal of Environmental Management, 33:161-167
Hobbs RJ and Saunders DA (1993) Effects of landscape fragmentation in agricultural areas, Conservation Biology in
Australia and Oceania, C Moritz and J Kikkawa (eds) Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, pp. 77-95
Hobson ME and Carey B (1994) State of the land: an overview of land management issues in Queensland, Qld Department of
Primary Industries, Brisbane
147
Hofler AJ (ed)(1984) Focus on farm treesthe decline of trees in the rural landscape, Proceedings of the 2nd National
Conference on the Decline of Trees in the Rural Landscape, University of New England, New South Wales
Holdgate M (1996) The Ecological Significance of Biological Diversity, Ambio, 25(6):409-416
Holland HD (1984) The Chemical Evolution of the Atmosphere and the Oceans, Princeton University Press, Princeton
Hollick M (1995) Personal and group decision processes, Participative Approaches for Landcare, S Chamala and K Keith
(eds), Australian Academic Press, Bowen Hills, pp. 43-57
Holling C (1986) The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: local suprise and global change, Sustainable development of
the biosphere, W Clarke and R Munn (eds), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 292-316
Holmes JH and Mott JJ (1993) Towards the diversified use of Australias savannas, The Worlds Savannas. Economic
Driving Forces, Ecological Constraints and Policy Options for Sustainable Land Use, MD Young and OT Solbrig (eds),UNESCO,
Paris and Parthenon Publishing Group, New York, pp. 283-320
Hone P, Edwards G and Fraser I (1999) Agricultural land retirement and biodiversity policy, Agenda, 6(3):211-224
Hoult EH (1970) Ecological Investigations of the Reactions of Trees to Drought, M Sc thesis, University of New England,
Armidale NSW
House AP (1997) Ecological processes in tropical forest rehabilitation: a perspective. Keynote address, Proceedings of
the 6th International Workshop of BIO-REFOR, Brisbane, December 2-5, 1997, J Kikkawa, P Dart, D Doley, K Ishii, D Lamb,
K Suzuki (eds), pp. 191-197
House JI and Hall DO (1999) Tropical savannas and grasslands, Terrestrial Global Productivity: Past, Present and Future,
H Mooney, J Roy and B Saugier (eds), Academic Press, San Diego
House S, M Nester, D Taylor, J King and D Hinchley (1998) Selecting Trees for the Rehabilitation of Saline Sites in South East
Queensland, Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
House J, Scanlan JC, Coughenour M, Gignoux J, Le Roux X, McKeon G, Parton WJ, Scholes WJ, and Simioni G (in prep)
Modelling tree-grass ecosystems: testing and comparing the approach of four savanna models
Howden SM, JL Moore, GM McKeon, PJ Reyenga, JO Carter and JC Scanlan (1999) Dynamics of mulga woodlands in
south west queensland, global change impacts and adaptation, MODSIM 99, Proceedings of the International Congress on
Modelling and Simulations
Hughes K, (1984) Trees and salinity, Queensland Agricultural Journal, 110:13-15
Hughes L and Westoby M (1994) Climate change and conservation policies in Australia: coping with change that is far
away and not yet certain, Pacific Conservation Biology, 1(4):308-318
Humphries SE, Groves RH and Mitchell DS (1991) Plant invasions of Australian ecosystems. A status review and
management directions, Kowari, 2:1-134
Hundloe T, McDonald G, Blamey R, Wilson B and Carter M (1990) Non-extractive Natural Resource Use in the Great Sandy
Region, report to the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage, Griffith University, Brisbane
Hussey P (1995) Factors promoting or reducing the maintenance of native vegetation on farms in Western Australia,
R&D on Socio-Economic Aspects of Maintaining Native Vegetation on Agricultural Land Proceedings of a National Workshop and
Associated Papers, P Price (ed), Occasional Paper Series No 07/95Land and Water Research and Development
Corporation, Canberra, pp. 30-33
Hussey BMJ and Wallace KJ (1993) Managing Your Bushland, Department of Conservation and Land Management, Como,
Western Australia
Hussey BMJ, Hobbs RJ and Saunders DA (1989) Guidelines for bush corridors, From the workshop on Nature
Conservation: the role of corridors, Western Australia, September 1989
Hussey BMJ, Hobbs RJ and Saunders DA (1991) Guidelines for Bush Corridors, Surrey Beatty and Sons, Perth
Hutchings P and Saenger P (1987) Ecology of Mangroves, University of Queensland Press, Brisbane
Hyam AA (1995) The Law Affecting Valuation of Land in Australia, Law Book Company, Sydney
Murcia C (1995) Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for conservation, Trends in Evolution and Ecology,
10:58-62
Iles AT (1996) Adaptive management: Making environmental law and policy more dynamic, experamentalist and
learning, Environmental and Planning Law Journal, August 1996, pp. 288-307
Industry Commission (1998) A Full Repairing Lease: Inquiry into Ecologically Sustainable Land Management, Report No. 60,
Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra
Industry Sciences Resources (1999) Key Australian Industry Facts 1998-1999, Department of Industry, Science and
Resources, Canberra
Interdepartmental Committee (1969) Report of the Inter-departmental Committee on Scrub and Timber Regrowth in the CobarByrock District and other areas in the Western Division of NSW, Government Printer, Sydney
IPCC (1997) Revised 1996 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Volumes 1 to 3, IPCC, United Kingdom
Isbell RF (1966) Soils of the East Bald Hills area, Collinsville District North Queensland, Soils Land Use Series No 48, CSIRO
Australian Division of Soils, Canberra
148
James D (1991) Economics, Environment and Sustainable Development, Occasional Publication No. 1, Resource Assessment
Commission, Canberra
James CD, Landsberg J and Morton SR (1999) Provision of watering points in the Australian arid zone: A review of
effects on biota, Journal of Arid Environments, 41:87-121
Jenkins K (1996) Mulga thinning and fertile patches, Rural Research, 170: 19-22
Johns GG (1981) Hydrological processes and herbage production in shrub invaded poplar box (Eucalyptus populnea)
woodlands, Australian Rangeland Journal, 3:45-55
Johnson, R.W. (1964) Ecology and Control of Brigalow in Queensland, Queensland Department of Primary Industries,
Brisbane.
Johnson K (1996) Native Australian Plants, Horticulture and Uses, University of New South Wales Press, New South Wales
Johnson RW (1997) The impact of clearing on brigalow communities and consequences for conservation, Conservation
Outside Nature Reserves, P Hale and D Lamb (eds), Centre for Conservation Biology, University of Queensland, Brisbane,
pp. 359-363
Johnston TN (1975) Thinning Studies in Cypress Pine in Queensland, Queensland Forestry Department Research Paper
Number 7, Queensland Forestry Department, Queensland
Johnston TN (1987) Management of cypress pine forests in Queensland, paper prepared for the International Foresters
Association conference Perth 1987, unpublished
Johnston PW, McKeon, GM and Day KA (1996) Objective safe grazing capacities for south-west Queensland,
Australia: Development of a model for individual properties, Rangelands Journal, 18:244-58
Joyce M (1990) Field day notes. Tree management for sustainable animal production, Australian Society of Animal Production
and Tropical Grassland Society of Australia, Brisbane
Junk WJ, Bayley PB and Sparks RE (1989) The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems, Canadian Special
Publication in Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 106:110-127
Karingal Consultants (1994) The Australian Wildflower Industry: a Review. Research Paper 94/9, RIRDC, Canberra
Karssies LE and Prosser IP (1999) Guidelines for Riparian Filter Strips for Queensland Irrigators, Technical Report 32/99,
CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra
Kauffman JB, Stanford Jr RL, Cummings DL, Salcedo IH and Sampaio EVSB (1993) Biomass and nutrient dynamics
associated with slash fires in neotropical dry forests, Ecology, 74(1):140-151
Kennard DG and Walker BH (1973) Relationships between canopy cover and Panicum maximum in the vicinity of Fort
Victoria, Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research, 11:145-153
Kile GA (1981) An overview of eucalypt dieback in rural Australia, Eucalypt Dieback in Forests and Woodlands, KM Old,
GA Kile and CP Ohmart (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 161-66
Kile GA, Grieg PJ and Edgar JG (eds) (1980) Tree decline in rural Victoria, Institute of Foresters of Australia, Victoria
Kimber (R. (1983) Black lightening: Aborigines and fire in central Australia and the western desert, Archaeology in
Oceania, 18:361-379
King J (1995) A Report on Insect Populations in Riparian Forests of the Macintyre River. Internal Report produced for Inglewood
Landcare Group, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland
King C, Gunton J, Freebairn D, Coutts J, and Webb I (in prep) The sustainability indicator industry: where to from here?
A focus group study to explore the potential of farmer participation in the development of indicators
Kingston BR (1965) The origins of Queenslands comprehensive land policy, Queensland Heritage, 1(2):3-8
Kirby JM and Blunden BG (1992) Traffic loadings and soil compaction, Proceedings of the Sixth Australian Cotton
Conference, Broadbeach, Australia, pp. 31-41
Kirkpatrick J (1994) A Continent Transformed. Human Impact on the Natural Vegetation of Australia, Oxford University Press,
Melbourne
Kitching RL (1994) Biodiversitypolitical responsibilities and agendas for research and conservation, Pacific
Conservation Biology, 1(4):279-283
Kitching R (1996) The role and responsibilities of scientists and scientific organisations in bioregional planning
Approaches to Bioregional Planning: Part 1, Proceedings of the conference, 30 Oct-1 Nov 1995 Melbourne, R Breckwoldt (ed),
Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, pp. 89-98
Koopowitz H, Thornhill AD and Andersen M (1994) A general stochastic model for the prediction of biodiversity losses
based on habitat conversion, Conservation Biology, 8:425-438
Kooyman R (1996) Growing Rainforest: Rainforest Restoration and Regeneration: recommendations for the humid sub-tropical
region of northern New South Wales and South-east Queensland, Greening AustraliaQueensland (Inc.), Brisbane
Krebs CJ (1994) Ecology: The Experimental Determination of Distribution and Abundance, Harper and Row, New York
Kubicki A, Denby AC, Stevens M, Haagensen A and Chatfield J (1993) Determining the long-term costs and benefits of
alternative farm plans, Reintegrating fragmented landscapes. Towards sustainable production and nature conservation,
RJ Hobbs and DA Saunders (eds.), Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 245-278
Lamb D (1994) Restoration of degraded forest ecosystems for nature conservation, Conservation Biology in Australia and
Oceania, C Moritz and J Kikkawa (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, New South Wales
Lamb D (1997) Biodiversity restoration by plantation, Tropical Forest Update, 7(2):3-5.
149
Lambeck RJ (1999) Landscape Planning for Biodiversity Conservation in Agricultural Regions. A case study from the wheatbelt of
Western Australia, Biodiversity Technical Paper No. 2, Department of Environment and Heritage, Canberra
Lambert JA and Elix J (1996) Community involvement: incorporating values, needs and aspirations of the wider
community in bioregional planning, Approaches to Bioregional Planning Part 1. Proceedings of the Conference, 30 October
1 November 1995, R Breckwoldt (ed), Biodiversity Series Paper No. 10, Department of Environment, Sport and
Territories, Canberra, pp. 59-66
Lambert JA, Elix JK, Chenowith A and Cole S (1996) Bioregional planning for biodiversity conservation, Approaches to
Bioregional Planning, Part 2. Background Papers to the Conference, 30 Oct-1 Nov 1995, Melbourne, Biodiversity Series, Paper
No. 10Department of Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, pp. 9-78
Landsberg J (1988) Dieback of rural eucalypts: tree phenology and damage caused by leaf feeding insects, Australian
Journal Ecology, 13:251267
Landsberg J (1990) Dieback of rural eucalypts: response of foliar dietary quality and herbivory to defoliation,
Australian Journal of Ecology, 15:89-96
Landsberg J and Cork S (1997) Herbivory: interactions between eucalypts and the vertebrates in invertebrates that feed
on them, Eucalypt Ecology, J Williams and J Woinarski (eds), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 342-372
Landsberg J and Wylie FR (1983) Water stress, leaf nutrients and defoliation: a model of dieback of rural eucalypts,
Australian Journal Ecology, 8:27-41
Landsberg J and Wylie FR (1991) A review of rural dieback in Australia, Growback 91,T Offor and RJ Watson (eds),
Growback Publications, Fitzroy, Victoria
Landsberg J, Morse J and Khanna P (1990) Tree dieback and insect dynamics in remnants of native woodlands on
farms, Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia, 16:149165
Landsberg J, James C and Morton S (1997a) Assessing the effects of grazing on biodiversity in Australias rangelands,
Australian Biologist, 10:153-162
Landsberg J, James C, Morton S, Hobbs T, Stol J and Drew A (1997b) Changes in biodiversity along gradients of grazing
intensity in the Australian rangelands, I. Plants, Conservation Outside Nature Reserves, Proceedings of a conference held at
the Centre for Conservation Biology, University of Queensland, February 5-8, Hale P and Lamb D (eds), Centre for
Conservation Biology, University of Queensland, Brisbane
Landsberg J, James C, Morton S, Hobbs T, Stol J, Drew A and Tongway H (1997c) The Effects of Artificial Sources of Water
on Rangeland Biodiversity: Final report to the Biodiversity Convention and Strategy section of the Biodiversity Group,
Environment Australia, Canberra
Lang W (1998) Certification of forest management and the use of performance indicator, Proceedings of Australian
Forest Growers Conference, Lismore, NSW, July 1998, New South Wales
Laurance WF (1994) Rainforest fragmentation and the structure of small mammal communities in tropical
Queensland, Biological Conservation, 69:23-32
Laurance WF and Yensen E (1991) Predicting the impacts of edge effects in fragmented habitats, Biological
Conservation, 55:77-92
Lawrence G (1998) The institute for sustainable regional development, Central Queensland University, Sustainable
Futures: Towards a Catchment Management Strategy for the Central Queensland Region. Rockhampton. ISRD, J Grimes,
G Lawrence and D Stehlik (eds), pp.6-8
Lawrence G (2000) Global perspectives on rural communitiestrends and patterns, Paper Presented to the International
Landcare 2000 Conference, Melbourne Convention Centre, Melbourne, 2-5 March
Lawrence PA and Sinclair DP (1989) Catchment hydrology and soil loss, Changes in Hydrology, Soil Fertility and
Productivity of Brigalow Catchments Following Clearing, PA Lawrence and PJ Thorburn (eds), Queensland Department of
Primary Industries, Rockhampton, pp. 2.1-2.98
Lawrence PA, Cowie BA and Thorburn PJ (1993) Water balance and soil fertility characteristics of brigalow (Acacia
harpophylla) land before and after forest clearing, Proceedings of the XVII International Grassland Congress, pp. 2242-2244
Laycock WA (1994) Implications of grazing versus no grazing on todays rangelands, Ecological Implications of Livestock
Herbivory in the West, M Varna, WA Laycock and RD Pieper (eds), Society of Rangeland Management, Denver, Colorado,
pp. 250-280
Lear R and Turner T (1977) Mangroves of Australia, University of Queensland Press, Brisbane
Lee D, Nikles D, and Walker S (2000) The genetic improvement of native hardwood timber species in Queensland
Case studies of three commercially important species Proceedings of 2nd Managing and Growing Trees Training Conference,
October 1998, Department of Natural Resources, Queensland, in press
Lefroy EC and Hobbs RJ (1998) Agriculture as a mimic of natural ecosystems: workshop report for the RIRDC/LWRRDC/
FWPRDC Joint Agroforestry Program, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Barton, ACT
Lennon J (1998) Identification and assessment of national estate aesthetic values: South East Queensland Bioregion, Regional
Forest Assessment, Department of Natural Resources Forests Taskforce, Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet,
Canberra
Levins R (1969) Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological for
biological control, Bulletin of Entomological Society of America, 15:237-240
150
Lindemmayer DB (1994) Timber harvesting impacts on wildlife: implications for ecologically sustainable forest use,
Australian Journal of Environmental Management, 1:56-68
Littleboy M, Silburn DM, Freebairn DM, Woodruff D and Hammer GL (1989) PERFECT: a Computer Simulation Model of
Productivity, Erosion, Runoff Functions to Evaluate Conservation Techniques, QDPI, Brisbane
Littleboy M, Silburn DM, Freebairn DM, Woodruff D, Hammer GL and Leslie JK (1992) Impact of soil erosion on
production in cropping systems, Australian Soil Research, 30:757-774
Lockwood M and Walpole S (1999) Benefit Cost Analysis of Remnant Native Vegetation Conservation, Johnstone Centre
Report No 130, Johnstone Centre, Albury
Loney B and Hobbs RJ (1991) Management of vegetation corridors: maintenance, rehabilitation and establishment,
Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridors, DA Saunders and R Hobbs (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons, pp. 300-308
Lonsdale WM (1994) Inviting trouble: introduced pasture species in northern Australia, Australian Journal of Ecology,
19:345-354.
Loreau M (1998) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: a mechanistic model, Proceedings of National Academy of
Science USA, 95:5632-5636
Loveday J and BJ Bridge (1983) Management of salt-affected soils, Soils an Australian Viewpoint, CSIRO, Academic
Press, Melbourne
Lovejoy D (1973) Land Use and Landscape Planning, Leonard Hill Books, England
Lovejoy TE, Bierregaard AB, Rylands JR, Malcolm CE, Quintela LH, Harper KS, Brown AH, Powell GVN, Powell HOR and
Hays MB (1986) Edge and other effects of isolation on amazon forest fragments, Conservation Biology: The Science of
Scarcity and Diversity, ME Soul (ed) Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, pp. 257-285
Low T (1988) Wild Food Plants of Australia, Angus and Robertson, North Ryde
Low T (1999) Feral Future: The Untold Story of Australias Exotic Invaders, Viking, Ringwood, Australia
Lowry B (1989) Agronomy and forage quality of Albizia lebbek in the semi-arid tropics, Tropical Grasslands, 23:84-91
Loyn RH (1985) Ecology, distribution and density of birds in Victoria forests, Birds of Eucalypt Forests and Woodlands:
Ecology, Conservation, Management, A Keast, HF Recher, H Ford and D Saunders (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons Pty Ltd. in
association with Royal Australian Ornithologists Union, Chipping Norton, New SouthWales, pp. 33-46
Loyn RH (1987) Effects of patch areas and habitat on bird abundances, species numbers and tree health in fragmented
Victorian forests, Nature Conservation: The Role of Remnants of Native Vegetation, DA Saunders, GW Arnold, AA Burbidge
and AJM Hopkins (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons in association with CSIRO and CALM, Chipping Norton, pp. 65-75
Loyn RH and Middleton WGD (1981) Eucalypt decline and wildlife in rural areas, Eucalypt Dieback in Forests and
Woodlands, KM Old, GA Kile and CP Ohmart (eds), CSIRO, Australia, pp. 95111
Lubulwa M (1997) Loddon and Campaspe Catchments: Costs of Salinity to Urban Households, Report to the Murray Darling
Basin Commission, ABARE, Canberra
Ludwig JA, Eager RW, Williams RJ and Lowe LM (1999) Declines in vegetation patches, plant diversity, and
grasshopper diversity near cattle watering -points in the Victoria River District, Northern Australia, Rangeland Journal,
21:135-149
Ludwig JA, Wiens JA, and Tongway DJ (2000) A scaling rule for landscape patches and how it applies to conserving
soil resources in savannas, Ecosystems, 3:84-97
Ludwig JA, Eager RW, Liedloff AC, McCosker JC, Hannah D, Thurgate NY, Woinarski JCZ, and Catterall CP (in prep)
Impact of clearing and grazing on vegetation patch structure and fauna counts in Eucalypt woodland, Central
Queensland, Pacific Conservation Biology
LWRRDCLand and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation (1999) Social and Institutional Research
Plan 1999-2004, Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
Lynch JJ and JB Donnelly (1980) Changes in pasture and animal production resulting from the use of windbreaks
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 31:967-979
Lyons T J, Hacker JM, Foster IJ, Schwerdtfeger P, Smith RGC, Xinmei H and Bennett JM (1993) Land atmosphere
interaction in a semi arid region: the bunny fence experiment, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 74:1327-1334
Mac Arthur RH and Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography, PrinctonUniversity Press, Princeton
Mackay SM, Humphreys FR, Clark RV, Nicholson DW and Lind RR (1984) Native Tree Dieback and Mortality on the New
England Tablelands of New South Wales, Forestry Commission NSW Research Paper 3, New South Wales
MacNae W (1966) Mangroves in eastern and southern Australia, Australian Journal of Botany, 14:67-104
MacNally R and Parkinson A (1999) Edges define the stream! Restoring the integrity of riparian zones beginning with
coarse woody debris (CWD) on the MurrayDarling floodplain, Proceedings, Second Australian Stream Management
Conference, 8-11 February, Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 411-416
Marcar N, Crawford D, Leppert P, Jovanovic T, Floyd R and Farrow R (1995) Trees for saltlanda guide to selecting native
species for Australia, CSIRO Division of Forestry, Australia
Marino BDV and Odum HT (1999) Biosphere 2: Research Past and Present, Elsevier Science, New York
Marsh WM (1998) Landscape Planning: Environmental Applications, John Wiley and Sons, New York
151
Marsh N, Rutherfurd I and Jerie K (1999) Large woody debris in some Australian streams: natural loading, distribution
and morphological effects, Proceedings, Second Australian Stream Management Conference, 8-11 February, Adelaide, South
Australia, p. 427
Martin TG, Best, KM, McIntyre S, McIvor JG and MacLeod ND (2000) Four Southeast Queensland Grazing Properties:
Patterns of Land Use and Ecological Status, Technical Memorandum No. 5, CSIRO Tropical Agriculture, Brisbane
Matlack GR (1993) Sociological edge effects: Spatial distribution of human impact in suburban forest fragments,
Environmental Management, 17:829-835
Mc Loughlin L (1997) The impact of planting for restoration of remnant bushland on its scientific and educational
values: implications for conservation planning, Pacific Conservation Biology, 3 (1):27-38
McAlpin C (1999) Framework for Integrating Landscape Ecology into Forest Management in South-East Queensland: Science and
the Action, Sustainable Forest Management, Technical Report No 1999/01,Forest Ecosystem and Research and
Assessment, Queensland Department of Natural Resources, September, 1999
McCarthy J (1995) The Australian Native Foods Industry: New Challenges for the Plant Propagator, IPPS proceedings, Vol 45
McCosker T and Winks L (1994) Phosphorus Nutrition of Beef Cattle in Northern Australia, Information Series QI94012,
McCown RL, Hammer GL, Hargreaves JNG, Holzworth D and Freebairn DM (1996) APSIM: A novel software system for
model development, model testing, and simulation in agricultural systems research, Agricultural Systems, 50:255-71
McDonald G, Burgman M, Cork S, Lane M, Mackey B, McCormack R, Raison J and Wilkinson G (1999) Assessment of
Systems and Processes for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management in Southeast Queensland, Government Report,
Queensland Department Natural Resources and Commonwealth Government, Queensland
McFarland D (1992) Fauna of the Channel Country Biogeographic Region, South West Queensland, Unpublished report,
Department of Environment and Heritage, Brisbane
McFarlane DJ, George RJ and Farrington P (1995) Changes in the hydrologic cycle, Reintegrating Fragmented Landscapes,
Hobbs RJ and Saunders DA (eds), Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 146-186
McGarigal F, Berry J and Buckley D (1998) FRAGSTAT. Ecological software for assessing landscape structure, Pacific Meridian
Resources
McGarry D (1987) The effect of soil water content during land preparation on aspects of soil physical condition and
cotton growth, Soil and Tillage Research, 9:287-302
McGarry D (1993) Degradation of soil structure Land Degradation Processes in Australia, GH McTainsh and WC
Boughton (eds), Cheshire, Melbourne, pp. 271-305
McGarry D, Pillai UP and Braunack MV (2000) Optimising soil structure condition for croppingwithout tillage,
Proceedings of the International Soil and Tillage Research Organisation Conference, Fort Worth, Texas, July 2000, in prep
McGarry D, Sharp G and Bray SG (1999) The Current Status of Soil Degradation in Queensland Cropping Soils, Queensland
Department of Natural Resources, DNRQ990092
McIntyre S (1992) Risks associated with the setting of conservation priorities from rare plant species lists, Biological
Conservation, 60:31-37
McIntyre S (1994) Integrating agricultural land-use and management for conservation of a native grassland flora in a
variegated landscape, Pacific Conservation Biology, 1(3):236-44
McIntyre S (1998) Diversity and Sustainability in Grassy Eucalypt Ecosystems, Occasional Paper No. 04/98, Land and Water
Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
McIntyre S and Barret GW (1992) Habitat variegation, an alternative to fragmentation, Conservation Biology, 6:146-147
McIntyre S and Hobbs R (1999) A framework for conceptualising human effects on landscapes and its relevance to
management and research models, Conservation Biology, 13:1282-1292
McIntyre S and Lavorel S (1994) Predicting richness of native, rare and exotic plants in response to habitat and
disturbance variables across a variegated landscape, Conservation Biology, 8:521-531
McIntyre S, Lavorel S, Landsberg J and Forbes TDA (1999) Disturbance response in vegetation, Journal of Vegetation
Science, 10:621
McIntyre S, McIvor JG and MacLeod ND (2000) Principles for sustainable grazing in eucalypt woodlands: landscapescale indicators and the search for thresholds, Management for Sustainable Ecosystems, P Hale, A Petrie, D Moloney and P
Sattler (eds), Centre for Conservation Biology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 92-100
McIvor JG (1990a) Pasture improvement on eucalypt country in North Queensland, The Management of Eucalypt
Country in North Queensland, Dalrymple Landcare Committee, Charters Towers
McIvor JG (1990b) Sustainable land management for beef production in the semi-arid tropics, Agriculture and the
Ecosystem in North Queensland: Proceedings of a symposium, Townsville, AIAS Occasional Publication No. 51, pp. 7-13
McIvor J (1998) Pasture management in semi-arid tropical woodlands: Effects on species diversity, Australian Journal of
Ecology, 23:349-364
McIvor JG and Gardener CJ (1995) Pasture management in semi-arid tropical woodlands: effects on herbage yields and
botanical composition, Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 35 (6):705-715
152
McIvor JG and Gardener CJ (1998) Population dynamics of Stylosanthes hamata and S. scabra in north-eastern
Queensland: effects of superphosphate application, timber treatment, and stocking rate, Australian Journal of Agricultural
Research, 49:10271037
McIvor JG and MacLeod ND (1999) Exploring the production implications of best practice conservation management
in grassy woodlandsa whole of property modelling approach, VIth International Rangeland Congress Proceedings Vol. 2,
pp. 1030-1031
McIvor J, Bishop H, McKeague P and Middleton C (1991) The place for sown pastures, Sown Pastures for the Seasonally
Dry Tropic, IJ Partridge and CP Miller (eds), Conference and Workshop Series QC91002, Department of Primary
Industries Brisbane.
McIvor JG, Williams J and Gardener CJ (1995) Pasture management influences runoff and soil movement in the semiarid tropics, Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 35:55-65
McKenzie DC (1998) SOILpak For cotton growers. (3rd edition), NSW Agriculture, Orange, New South Wales
McKeon GM, Day KA, Howden SM, Mott JJ, Orr DM, Scattini WJ and Weston EJ (1990) Northern Australian savannas:
management for pastoral production, Journal of Biogeography, 17:355-72
McKergrow L, Prosser I and Heiner D (1999) Preliminary results on the effectiveness of riparian buffers in Far North
Queensland, Proceedings, Second Australian Stream Management Conference, 8-11 February, Adelaide, South Australia,
pp. 439-444
McLennan SR, Hendricksen RE, Beale IF, Winks L, Miller CP and Quirk MF (1988) The nutritive value of native
pastures, Native Pastures in Queensland: The Resources and their Management, WH Burrows, JC Scanlan and MT
Rutherford, Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane pp. 125-159
McQuillan A (1998) Defending the ethics of ecological restoration, Journal of Forestry, 96(1):27-31
McTainsh G (1993) Soils, Land Degradation Processes in Australia, G McTainish and WC Boughton (eds), Longman
Cheshire, Melbourne, pp. 52-90
Meinke H, Carberry PS, Cleugh H, Poulton P and Hargreaves JNGH (in press) Modelling crop growth and yield under
the environmental changes induced by windbreaks 1. Model development and validation, Agroforestry Systems
Meyer-Homji VM (1992) Probable impact of deforestation on hydrological processes, Tropical Forests and Climate,
(special edition of Climatic Change 19, numbers 1 and 2) N Meyers (ed), Kluwer Academic Publications Dordrecht,
Netherlands, pp. 163-174
Meyers N (1996) Environmental services of biodiversity, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA,
93: 2764-2769
Miles RL (1993) Soil Degradation Processes in a Semi-arid Woodland, Ph. D. Thesis, Griffith University, Brisbane
Miles CA, Lockwood M, Walpole S and Buckley E (1998) Assessment of the On-farm Economic Values of Remnant Native
Vegetation, Johnstone Centre Report No. 107, Johnstone Centre, Charles Sturt University, Albury
Miller CP, Wildin JH, Cooksley DG and Lowe KF (1988) Augmenting native pastures with sown species, Native Pastures
in Queensland: The Resources and their Management, WH Burrows, JC Scanlan, MT Rutherford, Queensland Department of
Primary Industries, Brisbane, pp. 160-173
Mills JR, Turner EJ and Caltabiano TC (1989) Land Degradation in South-Western Queensland, Project Series. No. QO89008,
Minson DJ (1990) Forage in Ruminant Nutrition, CSIRO Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures, Academic Press, Sydney
Mobbs C and Dover S (1999) Social, Economic, Legal, Policy and Institutional R&D for Natural Resources Management: Issues
and Directions for LWRRDC, LWRRDC, Canberra
Moody PW and Aitken RL (1997) Soil acidification under some tropical agricultural systems. I. Rates of acidification
and contributing factors, Australian Journal of Soil Research, 35:163-73
Mooney HA and Ehrlich PR (1997) Ecosystem services: a fragmentary history, Natures Services: Societal Dependence on
Natural Ecosystems, GC Daily, Island Press Washington, DC, pp. 11-19
Moore JL, Howden SM, McKeon GM, Carter JO and Scanlan JC (1997) A method to evaluate greenhouse gas emissions
from sheep grazed rangelands in south west Queensland, MODSIM 1997 Proceedings of the International Congress on
Modelling and Simulation, December 8-11, Hobart, Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia, Canberra, pp. 137-142
Morgan CR, Schindler SC and Mitchell MJ (1989) The effects of feeding Omiscus asellus (Isopoda) on nutrient cycling in
an incubated hardwood forest soil, Biology and Fertility of Soils, 7:239-246
Morris JD and Thomson LAJ (1983) The role of trees in dryland salinity control, Proceedings of the Royal Society of
Victoria, 95(3):123-131
Morrish RB (1997) Managing wetlands on private land in the Lake Eyre Basin, Wetlands in a Dry Land: Understanding
for Management, WD Williams (ed), Environment Australia, Biodiversity Group, Canberra
Morton S (1990) The impact of European settlement on the vertebrate animals of arid Australia: a conceptual model,
Australian Ecosystems: 200 years of Utilisation Degradation and Reconstruction, Proceedings of the Ecological Society of
Australia, DA Saunders, AJM Hopkins and RA How (eds), 16:201-213
Morton SR (1992) Conservation and wildlife in the Australian arid rangelands: An introduction, Rangelands Journal,
14(2):63
153
Morton SR and Price P (eds) (1994) R&D for sustainable use and management of Australias Rangelands, LWRRDC
Occasional Paper Series No. 06/93, Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra.
Moss AJ and Green TW (1987) Erosive effects of the large water drops (gravity drops) that fall from plants, Australian
Journal of Soil Research, 25:9-20
Mott JJ and Tothill JC (1984) Tropical and subtropical woodlands, Management of Australias Rangelands, GN Harrington,
AD Wilson, MD Young (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne
Muir S (1992) Managing the vegetation, Rangeland Management in Western New South Wales, I Simpson (ed), New South
Wales Agriculture, pp. 29-39
MDBCMurray Darling Basin Ministerial Council (1999) The Salinity Audit of the Murray Darling Basin: A 100-year
perspective, Canberra, Australia
Murtagh J (1998) Tea tree oil, The New Rural Industries: A Handbook for Farmers and Investors, K Hyde (ed), Rural
Industries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
Nabhan GP and Buchmann SL (1997) Services provided by pollinators, Natures Services: Societal Dependence on Natural
Ecosystems, GC Daily (ed), Island Press Washington, DC, pp. 133-150
Nadolny C (1984) Eucalypt Dieback on the Northern Tablelands of New South Wales, M SC Thesis, University of New
England, Armidale, NSW
Naldolney C (1995) Causes of tree decline/dieback in New South Wales, Redressing rural tree decline in New South
Wales. Proceedings of the After Dieback Conference, Greening Australia, Sydney
Naldolney C (1998) Towards integrating farming and conservation: the role of native pastures, Pacific Conservation
Biology, 4:70-78
Naeem S (1998) Species redundancy and ecosystem reliability, Conservation Biology, 12(1):39-45
NAFINational Association of Forest Industries (1997) Joint Position on Farm Forestry, National Association of Forest
Industries, Statement 25 January 2000, http://www.nafi.com.au/media/farm-forestry.html
National Vegetation Initiative (1997) Saving the bush with people power, Australian Farm Journal: Bush, August 1997, p.12
Navie SC, McFadyen RE, Panetta FD and Adkins SW (1996) The biology of Australian weeds. 27. Parthenium
hysterophorus L., Plant Protection Quarterly, 11:76-88
Naylor RL and Ehrlich PR (1997) Natural pest control services and agriculture, Natures Services: Societal Dependence on
Natural Ecosystems, GC Daily (ed), Island Press Washington, DC, pp. 151-174
Neale R (1981) Report on Focus on farm trees conference, Landscape Australia, 1/81:31-39
Neilson L (1996) The many layers of planningwhere does bioregional planning sit?, Approaches to Bioregional
Planning. Part 1 Proceedings of the conference, 30 Oct-1 Nov 1995 Melbourne, R Breckwoldt (ed), Department of the
Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, pp. 33-41
Neldner VJ (1984) Vegetation survey of QueenslandSouth Central Queensland, Queensland Botany Bulletin No. 3,
Newsome AE (1975) An ecological comparison of the two arid-zone kangaroo of Australia and their anomalous
prosperity since the introduction of ruminant livestock to their environment, The Quarterly Review of Biology, 50: 389-424.
NGGICNational Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee (1994) SummaryAustralian Methodology for the Estimation of
Greenhouse Gas Emission and Sinks and National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1988 and 1990, Department of Environment,
Sports and Territories, Canberra
NGGICNational Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee (1999a) National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1997, National
Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee, Canberra
NGGICNational Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee (1999b) National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Land Use Change and
Forestry Sector 19901997, National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee, Canberra
NGGICNational Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee (1999c) National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Analysis of Trends
1990 to 1997 and National Greenhouse Response Strategy Selected Indicators 1990-1997, Australian Greenhouse Office,
Canberra
Nicholls N (1991) The El Nino/Southern Oscillation and Australian vegetation, Vegetatio, 91:23-36
Nix HA (1993) Bird distributions in relation to imperatives for habitat conservation in Queensland, Birds and their
Habitats: Status and Conservation in Queensland, CP Catterall, PV Driscoll, K Hulsman, D Muir and A Taplin (eds),
Queensland Ornithological Society Inc., Brisbane, pp.12-21
Noble I (1997a) The Contribution of Vegetation Thickening to Australias Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Report to the
Department of Environment, Sports and Territories.
Noble JC (1997b) The Delicate and Noxious Scrub, CSIRO, Canberra
Noble AD and Randall PJ (1998) How Trees Affect Soils, Report to the Rural Industries Research and Development
Corporation, RIRDC Publication No. 98/16, Canberra
Noble AD, Prescott JA and Stephens CG (1997) Evidence of accelerated soil acidification under Stylosanthes-dominated
pastures, Australian Journal of Soil Research, 35:1309-1322
154
Noble AD, Thompson CH, Jones RJ, Jones RM (1998) The long-term impact of two pasture production systems on soil
acidification in southern Queensland, Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 38:335343.
Northcote KH and JKM Skene (1972) Australian Soils with Saline and Sodic Properties, CSIRO Soil Publication No. 27, CSIRO
Melbourne
Northcote KH, Hubble GD, Isbell RF, Thompson CH and Bettenay E (1975) A Description of Australian Soils, CSIRO,
Melbourne
Noss RF (1983) A regional landscape approach to maintain diversity, Bioscience, 33:700-706
Noss RF (1987) Corridors in real landscapes: A reply to Simberloff and Cox, Conservation Biology, 1(2):159-164.
Noss RF (1990) Indicators for maintaining biodiversity: a hierarchical approach, Conservation Biology, 4:355-64
NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation (1997) Definitions and exemptions: State Environmental Planning Policy
No. 46Protection and Management of Native Vegetation, Amendment No. 2. NSW Department of Land and Water
Conservation, Sydney
ORourke PK, Winks L and Kelly AM (1992) North Australian Beef Producer Survey 1990, Queensland Department of
Primary Industries and Meat Research Corporation, Brisbane
Old KM (1979) Phytophthora and Forest Management in Australia, CSIRO, Melbourne
Old KM, Kile GA and Ohmart CP (1981) Eucalypt Dieback in Forests and Woodlands, CSIRO, Melbourne
Old KM, Murray DIL, Kile GA, Simpson J and Malafant KWJ (1986) The pathology of fungi isolated from cankers in
southeast Australia, Australian Forest Research, 16:2126
Oliver M, Wilson S, Gomboso J and Muller T (1996) The Costs of Salinity to Government Agencies and Public Utilities in the
MurrayDarling Basin, ABARE research report 96.2, ABARE, Canberra
Orchard AE and Wilson AJG (1999) Utilisation of the Australian flora, Flora of Australia (2nd edn) Volume 1 Introduction,
AE Orchard (ed), ABRS/CSIRO, Australia, pp. 437-66
Orr DM and Paton CJ (1997) Using fire to manage species composition in Heteropogon contortus (black speargrass)
pasture II. Enhancing the effect with grazing management, Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 48:803-810
Palzer C (1981) Eucalypt dieback in forests, Eucalypt Dieback in Forests and Woodlands, KM Old, GA Kile and CP Ohmart
(eds), CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 174-8
Panetta FD (1977) The effect of shade upon seedling growth in groundsel bush (Baccharis halimifolia L.), Australian
Journal of Agricultural Research, 28:681-690
Panetta FD and Hopkins AJM (1991) Weeds in corridors: Invasion and management Nature Conservation: The Role of
Corridors, DA Saunders and RJ Hobbs (eds) Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, NSW, pp. 341-351
Paoletti MG, Pimentel D, Stinner BR and Stinner D (1992) Agroecosystem biodiversity: matching production and
conservation biology, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 40:3-23
Parnell S (2000) In sickness and in health, The Courier Mail, Jan 2000
Parsons M (1999) Native Forests on Farms, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Project No: AAC-2A,
Publication No.99/21, Kinston ACT
Partridge IJ (1989) Leucaena: the Shrub Feed for Cattle Feed, Occasional Publication No. 2, Tropical Grassland Society of
Australia, Brisbane.
Partridge IJ (1996) Managing Mulga Grasslands: A Graziers Guide, Information Series QI96072, Queensland Department of
Primary Industries, Brisbane
Partridge IJ (1999) Managing Grazing in Northern Australia: A Graziers Guide, Information Series QI99026, Queensland
Partridge IJ and Miller CP (eds) (1991) Sown Pastures for the Seasonally Dry Tropics, Conference and Workshop Series
QC91002, Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Partridge IJ, Burrows WH and Weston EJ (eds) (1994) Sown Pastures for the Brigalow Lands, Department of Primary
Industries Conference and Workshop Series QC94005, Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Passmore JGI and Brown CG (1992) Property size and rangeland degradation in the Queensland mulga rangelands,
Rangelands Journal, 14(1):9-25
Paton DC, Carpenter G and Sinclair R (1994) The second bird atlas of the Adelaide Region. Part 1: Changes in the
distribution of birds: 1974-1975 vs 1984-1985, South Australian Ornithologist, 31:151-193
Pearce DW and Turner RK (1990) Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment, Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York
Peck AMJ, Thomas JF and Williamson DR (1983) Salinity issues: effects of man on salinity in Australia, Water 2000,
Report No. 8, AGPS, Canberra
Pengelly BC and Conway MJ (2000) Pastures on Cropping Soils: Which Tropical Pasture Legume to Use, Working Papers,
Tropical Grasslands Conference 2000, Tropical Grasslands Society, Brisbane
Petchey OL, McPhearson PT, Casey TM and Morin PJ (1999) Environmental warming alters food-web structure and
ecosystem function, Nature, 402:69-72
Pettit NE, Froend RH and Ladd PG (1995) Grazing in remnant woodland vegetation: changes in species composition
and life form groups, Journal of Vegetation Science, 6:121-130
Phelps D (1999a) Australias Bushfood Industry. A Brief Introduction, Department of Primary Industries note, Department of
Primary Industries, Queensland
155
Phelps D (1999b) Australias Bushfood Industry. Bushfood plants for Western Queensland, Department of Primary Industries
note, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland
Phelps WJ and Phelps DG (1999) Impacts of a foraging ant (Rhytidoponera sp.) upon the surrounding vegetation, People
and rangelands Building the Future, D Eldridge and D Freudenberger (eds), VI International Rangeland Congress,
pp. 651-652
Pickup G and Stafford Smith GM (1993) Problems, prospects and procedures for assessing the sustainability of pastoral
land management in arid Australia, Journal of Biogeography, 20:471-87
Pillai UP and McGarry D (1999) Structure repair of a compacted Vertisol with wet-dry cycles and crops, Soil Science
Society of America Journal, 63:201-210
Pimental D and Greiner A (1997) Environmental and socio-economic costs of pesticide use, Techniques for Reducing
Pesticide Use, D Pimental (ed), Wiley, UK, pp. 51-78
Pitman VG, Dowden HGM, Humphreys FR, Lambert M, Grieve AM and Scheltema FH (1977) The outfall connection,
Australian Natural History, 19:7481
Pitman M, Boardman K, Kirkpatrick J, Noble I and Slatyer R (1995) National Forest Conservation Reserves, Commonwealth
Proposed Criteria. A Position Paper, Commonwealth Government, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra
Plummer JA and Considine JA (1997) Genetic resources, Biology and Agronomy of selected Boronia Species for Production of
essential Oils and Flowers, RIRDC/HRDC Technical Report No 4, Plant sciences, University of Western Australia
PMSEIC (1999) Dryland salinity and its impact on rural industries and the landscape, Prime Ministers Science, Engineering
and Innovation Council, Canberra
Podger, FD (1973) Eucalypt dieback in Victoria, proceedings of the Lakes Entrance seminar 1973, GC Marks and RM
Idczak (eds), Forestry Commission Victoria, Melbourne, pp. 1525
Pook EW, Costin AB and Moore CWE (1966) Water stress in native vegetation during the drought of 1965, Australian
Journal of Botany, 14:257-67
Poole WE (1978) Management of Kangaroo Harvesting in Australia, Occasional Paper No. 2, Australian National Parks and
Wildlife Service, Canberra
Powell J (1996) Bioregional planning in AustraliaPast to present, Approaches to Bioregional Planning: Part 1, R
Breckwoldt (ed), Proceedings of the conference, 30 Oct-1 Nov 1995 Melbourne, Department of the Environment, Sport
and Territories, Canberra, pp. 21-32
Powell J (1998) People and Trees: A Thematic History of South East Queensland With Particular Reference to Forested Areas
18231997, Queensland CRA/RFA Steering Committee
Power AG (1996) Arthropod diversity in forest patches and agroecosystems of tropical landscapes, Forest Patches in
Tropical Landscapes, J Schelas and R Greenberg (eds), Island Press, Washington, pp. 91-110
Prebble RE and Stirk GB (1988) Hydrological effects of land use change on small catchments at the Narayen Research
Station, Queensland, Australian Journal of Soil Research, 26:231-242
Pressland AJ (1976a) Effect of stand density on water use of mulga (Acacia aneura F. Muell.) woodlands in southwestern Queensland, Australian Journal Botany, 24:177-191
Pressland AJ (1976b) Possible effects of removal of mulga on rangelands stability in south west Queensland, Australian
Rangeland Journal, 1:24-30
Pressland AJ (1982) Fire in the management of grazing lands, Tropical Grasslands, 16: 104-111
Pressland AJ, Scanlan JC and Myles DJ (1991) Ground flora composition influences rainfall-runoff and soil loss in
semi-arid tropical rangelands of Australia, International Rangelands Congression, Montpellier
Price P (Ed) (1995) R&D on socio-economic aspects of maintaining native vegetation on agricultural land, Proceedings of a
national workshop and associated papers, Land and Water Research and Development Corporation, Occasional Paper
Series No 07/95, Canberra
Price P and Tracy K (1996) National R&D Program on Rehabilitation, Management and Conservation of Remnant Vegetation,
Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
Prinsley RT (1991) Australian AgroforestrySetting the Scene for Future Research, Report to the Rural Industries Research
and Development Corporation, Canberra
Prober SM and Thiele KR (1995) Conservation of the grassy white box woodlands: relative contributions of size and
disturbance to floristic composition and diversity of remnants, Australian Journal of Botany, 43:349-366
Productivity Commission (2000) Implementation of Ecologically Sustainable Development by Commonwealth Departments and
Agencies: Final Report, Productivity Commission, Canberra
Proffitt APB, S Bendotti and D McGarry (1995) A comparison between continuous and controlled grazing on a red
duplex soil. I. Effects on soil physical characteristics, Soil Tillage Research, 35:199-210
Prosser IP, Hailes KJ, Melville, Avery RP and Slade CJ (1993) A comparison of soil acidification and aluminium under
Eucalyptus forest and unimproved pasture, Australian Journal of Soil Research, 31:245-254
Puckridge JT (1997) Wetland management in arid Australia. The Lake Eyre Basin as an example, Wetlands in a Dry
Land: Understanding for Management, WD Williams (ed), Environment Australia, Biodiversity Group, Canberra
156
Purbrick P (1998) Medicinal herbs, The New Rural Industries. A Handbook for Farmer and Investors, K Hyde (ed), RIRDC,
Canberra, pp. 371-376.
Pyne SJ (1991) Burning BushA Fire History of Australia, Allen and Unwin, Sydney
Queensland Government (1999) National Greenhouse Strategy. Queensland Implementation Plan, Queensland Government,
Brisbane
Queensland Tourism and Travel Corporation (1998) Being green keeps you out of the red, Ecotrends Newsletter, Sept
1998, pp. 475-80
Quinn RH (1992) Fisheries Resources of the Moreton Bay Region, Queensland Fish Management Authority, Brisbane.
Rae B (1990) Managing eucalypt country on Powlathanga, The Management of Eucalypt Country in North Queensland,
Dalrymple Land Care Committee, Charters Towers
Ramsay R and Rowe GC (1995) Environmental Law and Policy in Australia: Text and Materials, Butterworths, Sydney
Rawson A and Murphy B (1999) The Greenhouse Effect, Climate Change and Native Vegetation, A background paper of the
Native Vegetation Advisory Council of New South Wales, Department of Land and Water Conservation, New South Wales
Rayner (2000) Horticultural Production and the Bushfoods Industry, Down to Earth, Dec 99/ Jan 00, Burnely
Horticultural College, Victoria
Recher HF (1993) The loss of biodiversity and landscape restoration: conservation, management, survival. An
Australian perspective, Nature Conservation 3: Reconstruction of Fragmented Ecosystems, DA Saunders, RJ Hobbs and PR
Ehrlich (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, New South Wales, pp. 141-151
Recher HF (1999) The State of Australias avifauna: a personal opinion and prediction for the new millennium,
Australian Zoologist, 31(1):11
Recher HF and Lim L (1990) A review of current ideas of the extinction, conservation and management of Australias
terrestrial vertebrate fauna, Australian ecosystems, 200 years of utilization, degradation and destruction. Proceedings of the
ecological society of Australia, DA Saunders, AJM Hopkins and RA How (eds), 16:287-301
Recher HF, Kavanagh RP, Shields JM and Lind P (1991) Ecological associations of habitats and bird species during the
breeding season in southeastern New South Wales, Australian Journal of Ecology, 16:337-352
Regional Australia Summit (1999) Regional Australia Summit Website, Department of Transport and Regional Services,
Commonwealth of Australia, <www.dot.gov.au/regional/summit/index.htm>
Reichert SE and Bishop L (1990) Prey control by an assembly of generalist predators: spiders in garden systems,
Ecology, 71:1441-1450
Reichert SE and Lockley TC (1984) Spiders as biological control agents, Annual Review of Entomology, 29:299-1102
Reid N and Landsberg J (1999) Tree decline in agricultural landscapes: what we stand to lose, Conservation and
Management of Australias Temperate Woodlands, R Hobbs and C Yates (eds), Surrey Beatty, Sydney
Reid N and Thompson D (1999) Economics of windbreaks and sheep production on the Northern Tablelands,
Sustainable and Practical Vegetation Management into the New Millenium Economics and Environment, Proceedings of the
Australian Association of Natural Resource Management NSW Branch, 28-30 June, Norsearch Ltd (ed), Southern Cross
University, Lismore, pp. 120-127
Reid N, Chilcott C, Nott R and Lobry de Bruyn L (1998) The Ecosystem Function of Trees in Managed Temperate Pastures,
Final Report, Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, LWRRDC UNE12 University of New
England, Armidale, NSW
Reid N, Fittler J, Davies I and Hutchinson K (in press) Impact of sheepcamps, windbreaks and superphosphate-white
clover amendment of native pastures on wool production and bodyweight in merino wethers near Armidale, NSW
Resource Assessment Commission (1992) Forest and Timber Inquiry Final Report, Volume 2B, Appendix U, Australian
Government Publishing Service, Canberra
RCSResource Consulting Services (1999) Summary of Case Study Results for Development in the Desert Uplands, report
prepared for the Desert Uplands Buildup and Development Strategy Committee, Barcaldine
Reville B (1992) Saving the pieces? The National Endangered Species Program, On the Brink, 1:4-6
Reynolds JA and Carter JO (1993) What Landholders Reckon about Woody Weeds in Central Western Queensland, Queensland
Department of Primary Industries Project Report RQL 93001, Longreach
RIRDCRural Industries Research and Development Corporation (1997) Sustainability Indicators for Agriculture:
Introductory Guide to Regional/National Indicators and On-farm Indicators, Rural Industries Research and Development
Corporation, Canberra
RIRDCRural Industries Research and Development Corporation (1998) Tree for ProfitAn Integrated Economic Model
Shows How Farm Forestry Can Boost Regional Economies, The Short Report no.21, Rural Industries Research and
Development Corporation, Kinston ACT
RIRDCRural Industries Research and Development Corporation (2000) Determining the Effectiveness of Vegetation
Management Programs: Measures and MethodologiesLiterature Review, RIRDC No 99/130, Canberra
Robbins GR, Rickert KG and Humphreys LR (1986) Productivity decline in sown tropical pastures with age: the problem
and possible solutions, Proceedings of the Australian Scoiety of Animal Production, 16:319-322
Roberston JA and Beeston GR (1981) Methods of clearing and woody weed control in the poplar box (Eucalyptus
populnea) lands, Australian Rangeland Journal, 3:39-44
Roberts ES (1968) History of Australian land settlement 1788-1920, Macmillan, Melbourne
157
Roberts G (1984) Plotting a better future for lambs: A practical guide to providing shade, Queensland Agricultural
Journal, 110:25-26
Robertson AI (1997) The effect of livestock on wetlands, Wetlands in a Dry Land: Understanding for Management,
WD Williams (eds), Environment Australia, Biodiversity Group, Canberra
Robertson AI and Alongi DM (1995) Mangrove systems in Australia: Structure functions and status, State of the Marine
Environment Report for Australia. Technical Annex: 1. The Marine Environment, LP Zann and P Kailola (eds), Department
of the Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, pp. 53-59
Rolfe JC (1998) Carbon Offsets and Land Use Change, paper presented to the Land Development Option Forum, October
27, Barcaldine
Rolfe JC (1999) Report on the Long Term Economic Costs of Land Clearing in Queenslands Desert Uplands and Brigalow Belt,
Report prepared for the Queensland Conservation Council, Brisbane
Rolfe JC and Donaghy P (2000) Welfare Benefits: the changing face of the Queensland beef industry, paper presented
to the 44th annual conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Sydney
Rolfe JC, Bennett JW and Blamey RK (2000) An Economic Evaluation of Broadscale Tree Clearing in the Desert Uplands Region
of Queensland, Choice Modelling Research Report No. 12, University College, The University of New South Wales,
Canberra
Rolfe JC, Blamey RK and Bennett JW (in press) Valuing the preservation of rangelands: Tree clearing in the Desert
Uplands region of Queensland, The Rangeland Journal
Rolls EC (1981) A Million Wild Acres, Nelson, Melbourne
Rose CW (1993) Soil erosion by water, Land Degradation Processes in Australia, G McTainish and WC Boughton (eds),
Longman Cheshire, Melbourne, pp. 149-187
Rosenthal KM and White BJ (1980) Distribution of a Rainfall Erosion Index in Queensland, Division of Land Utilisation
Report 80/8, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland
Rosewall CJ (1993) SOILOSSA program to assist in the selection of management practices to reduce erosion, Technical
Handbook No 11 (second edition), Soil Conservation Service of New South Wales
Ross P (1990) SWIMA Simulation Model for Soil Water Infiltration and Movement, CSIRO, Townsville
Royal Commission (1901) Royal Commission to Inquire into the Condition of Crown TenantsWestern Division of NSW,
Government Printer, Sydney
Russel JS (1986) Improved pastures, Australian Soils the Human Impact, University of Queensland Press, St Lucia
Russell DJ and Hales PW (1994) Stream Habitat and Fisheries Resources of the Johnstone River, September 1993, DPI
Information Series QI93056, Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Russell IW, Izac NA-M and Cramb RA (1990) Towards an Evaluation of Offsite Impacts of Erosion in Queensland, University
of Queensland, Brisbane
Russell MJ, Young RA, Dorricott KE, Alcock KM, Glossop WJ, Pitt KM, McKilligan NG and McConnell P (1992) Planning
and Monitoring of Habitat Retention in Queensland, Unpublished report to Australian Nature Conservation Agency, ESP
Project 39, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba
Ryan DG, Ryan JE and Starr BJ (1995) The Australian LandscapeObservations of Explorers and Early Settlers,
Murrumbidgee Catchment Management Committee, Wagga Wagga, NSW
Saenger P (1995) The status of Australian estuaries and enclosed marine waters, State of the Marine Environment Report
for Australia, Technical Annex: 1. The Marine Environment, LP Zann and P Kailola (eds), Department of the Environment,
Sport and Territories, Canberra, pp. 53-59
Sainty GR, Jacobs SWL and Adcock P (1994) Waterplants to purify water, Waterplants in Australia, GR Sainty and SWL
Jacobs (eds), Sainty and Associates, Sydney, pp. 310315
SalCon (1997) Salinity Management Handbook, Department of Natural Resources Queensland Scientific Publishing,
Brisbane
Salinity Committee (1984) Salt of the Earth: Final Report on The Causes, Effects and Control of Land and River Salinity in
Victoria, Government of Victoria, Melbourne
Sattler PS (1993a) Towards a nationwide biodiversity strategy: the Queensland contribution, Conservation Biology In
Australia and Oceania, C Moritz and J Kikkawa (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, pp. 313-25
Sattler PS (1993b) Riparian zone management in Queensland the Northern Territory: Policy and practice, Ecology and
Management of Riparian Zones in Australia, SE Bunn, BJ Pusey and P Price (eds), Land and Water Resourced Research and
Development Corporation Occasional Paper Series No. 05/93, Canberra, pp. 157-171
Sattler P and Williams R (eds) (1999) The Conservation Status of Queenslands Bioregional Ecosystems, Environmental
Protection Agency, Queensland Government
Sattler PS and Webster RJ (1984) The Conservation status of Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) communities in
Queensland, The Brigalow Belt of Australia, A Bailey (ed), The Royal Society of Queensland: Brisbane, pp. 149-60
Sattler P, Morgan G and Wilson B (1997) Integration of bioregional conservation planning with ecologically sustainable
management: examples from the coastal lowlands and rangelands of Queensland, Conservation Outside Nature Reserves,
P Hale and D Lamb (eds.) Centre for Conservation Biology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, pp. 49-61
158
Saunders DA (1989) Changes in avifauna of a region, district and remnant as a result of fragmentation of native
vegetation: the wheatbelt of Western Australia. A case study, Biological Conservation, 35:111-142
Saunders DA and Curry P (1990) The impact of agricultural and pastoral industries on birds on the southern half of
Western Australia: past present and future, Australian Ecosystems: 200 years of Utilisation Degradation and Reconstruction.
Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia, DA Saunders, AJM Hopkins and RA How (eds), 16:303-321
Saunders DA and Hobbs RJ (1991) The role of corridors in conservation: what do we know and where do we go?,
Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridors, DA Saunders and R Hobbs (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons, pp. 421-427
Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ and Margules CR (1991) Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation. A review,
Conservation Biology, 5:18-32
Saunders DA, Rowley DAI and Smith GT (1985) The effects of clearing for agriculture on the distribution of cockatoos
in south west of Western Australia Birds of Eucalypt Forests and Woodlands: Ecology, Conservation, Management, A Keast,
HF Recher, H Ford and D Saunders, Surrey Beatty and Sons Pty Ltd. in association with Royal Australian Ornithologists
Union, Chipping Norton, New South Wales, pp 309-321
Scanlan, J.C. (1980) Effects of spring wildfires in Astrebla grasslands in north-west Queensland under various levels of
growing season rainfall, Australian Rangeland Journal, 2:162-168
Scanlan JC (1984) Aspects of the Ecology and Management of Eucalypt and Brigalow Communities in Central Queensland,
M. Agr. Sc. Thesis, University of Queensland
Scanlan JC (1986) Woody weed control in northern Australia, Tropical Grasslands Society of Australia, Occasional
Publication No. 3, GJ Murtagh and RM Jones (eds), pp. 11-19
Scanlan JC (1988) Managing tree and shrub populations, Native Pastures in Queenslandthe Resources and their
Management, Queensland Department of Primary Industries Information Series Q187023, Brisbane
Scanlan JC (1991) Woody overstorey and herbaceous understorey biomass in Acacia harpophylla (brigalow) woodlands,
Australian Journal of Ecology, 16:521-529
Scanlan JC (1992) A model of woody-herbaceous biomass relationships in eucalypt and mesquite communities,
Journal of Range Management, 45:75-80.
Scanlan JC and Anderson ER (1981) Use of heavy duty blade plough for regrowth control in brigalow
(Acacia harpophylla) region of central Queensland, Australian Weeds, 1(2):10-12
Scanlan JC and Burrows WH (1990) Woody overstorey impact on herbaceous understorey in Eucalyptus species
communities in central Queensland, Australian Journal of Ecology, 15:191-197
Scanlan JC and McIvor JG (1993) Pasture composition influences soil erosion in Eucalyptus woodlands, Proceedings
XVIIth International Grassland Congress, pp. 65-66
Scanlan JC and McKeon GM (1990) GRASSMANA Computer Program for Managing Native Pastures in Eucalypt Woodlands,
Scanlan JC and McKeon GM (1993) Competitive effects of trees on pasture are a function of rainfall distribution and
soil depth, Proceedings of the XVII International Grassland Congress : 8-21 February 1993, Palmerston North, New Zealand,
New Zealand Grassland Association, pp. 2231-2234
Scanlan JC and Turner EJ (1995) The Production, Economic and Environmental Impacts of Tree Clearing in Queensland,
A Report to the Working Group of the Ministerial Consultative Committee on Tree Clearing, Queensland Government
Report, Brisbane
Scanlan JC, Prinsley R, Pigott JP, Wakefield S, van der Sommen F, Duncan F, Stadler T, McLellan R and Fargo A (1992)
Retention of native woody vegetation on farms in Australia: Management considerations, planning guidelines and
information gaps, Agroforestry Systems, 20:141-166
Scanlan JC, McKeon GM, Day KA, Mott JJ and Hinton AW (1994) Estimating safe carrying capacities of extensive
cattle-grazing properties within tropical, semi-arid woodlands of north-eastern Australia, Rangeland Journal, 16:64-76
Scanlan JC, Pressland AJ and Myles DJ (1996) Run-off and soil movement on mid-slopes in North-East Queensland
grazed woodlands, Rangeland Journal, 18(1):33-46
Scherl L, Cassells D and Gilmour D (1994) Pluralistic planning-creating room for community action in the management
of the global environment, Presented to Fifth International Symposium on Society and Resource Management, 7-10 June 1994,
Fort Collins, Colorado
Scholes RJ and Archer SR (1997) Tree-Grass interactions in Savannas, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics,
28:517-544
Scholes RJ and van der Merwe MR (1996) Sequestration of carbon in savannas and woodlands, The Environmental
Professional, 18:96-103
Schmitt M (2000) Mentoring with the next generation. Children learn first-hand about their natural heritage, Quarterly
Water Review, February 2000
Scolfield NJ (1990) Effects of trees on saline groundwater tables, Agroforestry: Integration of Trees into the Agricultural
Landscape, Department of Agriculture, Perth, pp. 10-30
Scott JD (1947) Veld management in South Africa, Bulletin 278, Union of South Africa Department of Agriculture
Scougall A and Majer J (1991) The impact of fencing on soil, flora and soil fauna in remnants of open Jam-York gum
woodlands in the Western Australian wheatbelt, Soil Science and the Environment: Proceedings of a conference convened to
demonstrate the role of Soil Science in environmental management : Albany Town Hall, Albany, Western Australia, 20-21
159
September, 1991, Australian Society of Soil Science Inc. Wembley, Western Australia, pp. 11-31
Scrifes CJ, Mutz JL, Whitson RE and Drawe DL (1982) Interrelationships of huisache canopy cover with range forage
on the coastal praire, Journal of Range Management, 35:558-562
Searle R and Baillie J (1998) Prediction of Landscape Salinity Hazard Using Geographic Information System, Queensland
Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane
Sedgley A and F Horlock (1998) Acacias, The New Rural Industries: A Handbook for Farmers and Investors, KW Hyde (ed),
Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, pp. 371-6
Sewell A (1997) Australian Timbers Volume One: Commercial timber species of eastern subtropical Australia, Department of
Natural Resources, Queensland
Shafer CL (1990) Nature Reserves: Island Theory and Conservation Practice, Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington D.C.
Shankar V, Dadhich NK and Saxena SK (1976) Effect of Khejri tree (Prosopis cineraria MacBride) on the productivity of
range grasses growing in its vicinity, Forage Research, 2:91-96
Shaw JH (1967) Grass strips for erosion control, Queensland Agricultural Journal, 93:586-8
Shaw R (1997) Salinity and sodicity Sustainable crop production in the sub-tropics: an Australian perspective, Clarke AL and
PB Wylie (eds), Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Shaw R, Hughes K, Dowling T and Thorburn P (1986) Principles of Landscape, Soil and Water SalinityProcesses and
Management Options, Proceedings of Darling Downs Regional workshop, QDPI, Toowoomba, 11-13 March 1986, Part A
Shaw R, Brebber L, Ahern C and Weinand M (1994) A review of sodicity and sodic soil behaviour in Queensland,
Australian Journal of Soil Research, 32:143-72
Shearer BL, Tippett JT and Bartle JR (1987) Botryosphaeria ribis infection associated with death of Eucalyptus radiata in
species selsction trials, Plant Disease, 71:140-45
Silburn DM, Carroll C, Ciesiolka CAA and Hairsine P (1992) Management effects on runoff and soil loss from native
pasture in Central Queensland, Proceedings of 7th Aust. Biennial Rangeland Conference, Cobar NSW 5-8 October 1992,
Australian Rangeland Society, pp. 294-295
Silcock RG (1980) Seedling growth on mulga soils and the ameliorating effects of lime, phosphate fertilizer and surface
soil from beneath Poplar Box trees, Australian Rangeland Journal, 2(2):142-150
Simberloff D (1992) Do species area curves predict extinction in fragmented forest?, Tropical deforestation and species
extinction, TC Whitmore and JA Sayer (eds), Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 75-89
Simberloff D and Cox J (1987) Consequences and costs of conservation corridors, Conservation Biology, 1(1):63-71
Simpson I (ed) (1992) Rangeland Management in Western New South Wales, NSW Agriculture, Goulburn
Simpson P and W Whalley (1999) Trees, pasture and grazingwheres the balance?, VIth International Rangeland
Congress Proceedings Vol. 1, pp. 494-5
Sinden JA (1994) A review of environmental valuation in Australia, Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics,
62(3):337-368
Smith I (1988) The Effect Of Land Clearing and Utilisation on Stream Bank Vegetation of Two Sub-Catchments of the Mary river,
South-eastern Queensland, Thesis, University of New England
Smith P and Smith J (1994) Historical change in the bird fauna of western New South Wales: ecological patterns and
conservation implications, Future of fauna of Western NSW, D Lunney, S Hand, P Reed and D Butcher (eds), Transactions
of the Royal Zoological Society, RZSNSW, Mossman, pp. 123-47
Smith RGC, Huang Xinmei, Lyons TJ, Hacker JM and Hick PT (1992) Change In Land Surface Albedo and Temperature in
South-Western Australia Following Replacement of Perennial Vegetation By Agriculture: Satellite Observations, IAF No 92-0117.
World Space Congress, Washington, DC
Smith GT, Arnold GW, Sarres S, Abenspurg-Traun M and Steven DE (1996) Effects of habitat fragmentation and
livestock grazing on animal communities in remnants of gimlet Eucalyptus salubris woodland in the Western Australian
wheatbelt, 11: lizards, Journal of Applied Ecology, 33(6):1302-1310
Snell AJ and Brooks SJ (1999) The Effect of Windbreaks on Crop Growth on the Atherton Tablelands, Rural Industries
Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
Soule ME and Gilphin ME (1991) The theory of wildlife corridor capability, Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridors,
Saunders DA and Hobbs R (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons, Perth
Sousa WP (1984) The role of disturbance in natural communities, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 15:353-391
Southern Mallee Regional Planning Committee (1999) Southern Mallee Regional Policy for The Development of Land Use
Agreements-to address clearing, cultivation, nature conservation and cultural heritage issues, Southern Mallee Regional
Planning Committee, Draft paper
Spackman SC and Hughes JW (1995) Assessment of minimum stream corridor width for biological conservation:
species richness and distribution along mid-order streams in Vermont, USA, Biological Conservation, 71:325-332
Spain AV, Isbell RF and Probert ME (1983) Soil organic matter, Soils, an Australian Viewpoint, Division of Soils, CSIRO,
Melbourne, pp. 561-563
160
Specht RL (1994) Biodiversity and Conservation, Australian vegetation (2nd ed), RH Groves (ed), Cambridge University
Press, pp. 525-55
Specht RL and Specht A (1999) Australian Plant Communities: Dynamics of Structure, Growth and Biodiversity, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne
Squires VR (1990) Major issues in land management in Australia with particular reference to the role of educators,
Australian Ecosystems: 200 years of Utilization, Degradation and Reconstruction, Proceedings of Ecological Society of Australia,
DA Saunders, AJM Hopkins and RA How (eds), Vol. 16, Surrey Beatty and Sons, New South Wales
Start AN (1991) How can edge effects be minimised?, Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridors, Saunders DA and
Hobbs R (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons, Perth
Statham HL (1992) Brushtail Possums and Rural Dieback in TasmaniaA Preliminary Study, Unpublished report
Stirzaker RJ, Cook FJ and Knight JH (1999) Where to plant trees on cropping land for control of dryland salinity: some
approximate solutions, Agricultural Water Management, 39:115-133
Storfer A (1996) Quantitative genetics: a promising approach for the assessment of genetic variation in endangered
species, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 11:343-348
Stuart-Hill GC (1987) Refinement of a model describing forage production, animal production and profitability as a
function of bush density in the false thornveld of the eastern cape, Journal of the Grassland Society of South Africa, 4:1824
Stuth JW, Conner JR and Heitschmidt RK (1991) The decision-making environment and planning paradigm, Grazing
Management, An Ecological Perspective, RK Heitschmidt and JW Stuth (eds), Timber Press, Oregon, pp. 201-223
Sun D and Dickenson G (1995) Direct seeding for rehabilitation of degraded lands in north east Queensland,
Australian Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Vol. 8(4):14-17
Sutherst RW and Mo JM (1997) Potential Impact of Defoliating Insects in Rural Tree Decline under Climate Change, Internal
Report, CSIRO Entomology, Brisbane.
Swarbrick JT (1999) Seedling production by Madeira vine (Anredera cordifolia), Plant Protection Quarterly, 14:38-39
Swarbrick JT, Willson BW and Hannan-Jones MA (1995) The biology of Australian weeds 25. Lantana camara L., Plant
Protection Quarterly, 10:82-95
Swift MJ, Heal DW and Anderson M (1979) Decomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystems, University of California Press,
Berkeley, California
Szott LT, Fernandes ECM and Sanchez PA (1991) Soil-plant interactions in agroforestry systems Forest Ecology and
Management, 45:127-152
Tait J (1994) Lowland Habitat Mapping and Management Recommendations: Tully-Murray Catchments, Final Report, Cardwell
Shire Catchment Co-ordinating Committee, Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Queensland
Taylor P (1994) Growing up: Forestry in Queensland, Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Taylor JA and Hedges DA (1984) Some characteristics of the trees used by sheep for diurnal camping and differences
between the shade and nocturnal camps in a paddock on the Northern Tablelands of New South Wales, Australian
Rangelands Journal, 6:10-16
Taylor D and Nester M (2000) Sustainable Native Forest Management, Proceedings of 2nd Managing and Growing Trees
Training Conference, 19-21 October 1998, Department of Natural Resources, Queensland, in print
Teakle LJH (1950) Notes on the soils of Coastal Queensland and portions of the hinterland with special reference to
tropical latitudes, Pap Fac Agriculture Queensland, 1(1)
Thomas C (1995) What stops farmers keeping and managing native vegetation on their properties?, R&D on SocioEconomic Aspects of Maintaining Native Vegetation on Agricultural Land, Proceedings of a national workshop and associated
papers, P Price (ed), Land and Water Research and Development Corporation Occasional Paper Series No 07/95,
LWRRDC, Canberra, pp. 20-22
Thorburn PJ (1996) Can shallow water tables be controlled by the revegetation of saline lands?, Australian Journal of
Soil and Water Conservation, 9(3):45-50
Thorburn PJ (1999) Interactions between plants and shallow, saline water tablesSynopsis, Agricultural Water
Management, 39:89-90
Tilman D (1997) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, Natures Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems,
GC Daily (ed), Island Press Washington, DC, pp. 93-112
Tilman D (1999a) Diversity and production in European grasslands, Science, 286:1099-1100
Tilman D (1999b) Global environmental impacts of agricultural expansion: The need for sustainable and efficient
practices, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 96:5995-6000
Tilman D and Duvick DN (1999) Benefits of Biodiversity, Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, USA
Tilman D, Wedin D and Knops J (1996) Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland
ecosystems, Nature, 379:718-720
Timms BV (1997) Spatial and temporal variation in inundation of wetlands in the Paroo catchment of the
MurrayDarling, Wetlands in a Dry Land: Understanding for Management, WD Williams (ed), Environment Australia,
Biodiversity Group, Canberra
Timms BV (1999) Local runoff, Paroo floods and water extraction impacts on the wetlands of Currawinya National
Park, A free-flowing river: the ecology of the Paroo River, RT Kingsford (ed), New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife
Service, Hurstville
161
Tomley AJ (1995) The biology of Australian weeds, 26: Cryptostegia grandiflora R. Brown, Plant Protection Quarterly,
10:122-130
Tongway DJ and Ludwig JA (1995) Function and dysfunction in mulga woodlands, Ecological research and management
in the Mulga Lands, M Page and T Beutel (eds), University of Queensland, Gatton College, Gatton, pp. 85-90
Tongway DJ and Ludwig JA (1997) The conservation of water and nutrients within landscapes, Landscape Ecology:
Function and Management. Principles from Australias Rangelands, J Ludwig, D Tongway, D Freudenberger, J Noble and
K Hodgkinson (eds), CSIRO Publishing, Australia, pp. 13-22
Tooher JG and Dwyer BM (1997) Introduction to Property Law (3rd Ed), Butterworths, Sydney
Torrey JG (1981) Casuarina: actinorhizal dinitrogenfixing tree of the tropics, Casuarina Ecology, Management and
Utilisation, SJ Midgley, JW Turnbull and RD Johnston (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 193204
Tothill JC (1971) A review of fire in the management of native pasture with reference to north-eastern Australia,
Tropical Grasslands, 5:1-10
Tothill JC (1983) Comparison of native and improved pasture systems on speargrass, CSIRO Australia, Division of
Tropical Crops and Pastures, Annual Report 1982-1983, CSIRO, Melbourne, p.105
Tothill JC and Gillies C (1992) The Pasture Lands of Northern Australia: Their Condition, Productivity and Sustainability,
Tropical Grassland Society of Australia Occasional Publication No 5. Tropical Grassland Society of Australia, Brisbane
Tothill JC and Hacker JB (1996) The Grasses of Southern Queensland, The Tropical Grassland Society of Australia Inc,
St Lucia
Tothill JC, Mott JJ and Gillard P (1982) Pasture weeds of the tropics and subtropics with special reference to Australia,
Biology and Ecology of Weeds, W Holzner and N Numata (eds), Dr W. Junk, The Hague
Traill BJ and Collins E, Peake P and Jessup S (1996) Current and past status of the birds of Chiltern-a box-ironbark
forest in north-eastern Victoria, Australian Bird Watcher, 16:309-326
Treeby B (1999) New Best Practices and Changes in Agricultural and Environmental Education in New Zealand: a
review of the 1990s, Tsukuba Asian Seminar on Agricultural Education, The Open Polytechnic of New Zealand, October 1999
Tucker NIJ (2000) Linkage restoration: Interpreting fragmentation theory for the design of a rainforest linkage in the
humid Wet Tropics of north-eastern Queensland, Ecological Management and Restoration, 1(1):35-41
Turnbull JW (1986) Multipurpose Australian Trees and Shrubs, Lesser -known species for fuelwood and agroforestry, ACAIR
Monograph No 1
Turner EJ (1975) The use of land resource data in planning property development in the Fitzroy River Basin, Queensland,
Division of Land Utilisation Bulletin No 20.
Turner EJ, Beeston G and Ahern CR (1978) Western Arid Region Land Use Study Part IV. Technical Bulletin No 23, Division
of Land Utilisation, Department of Primary Industries.
Turner EJ, McDonald WJF, Ahern CR and Thomas MB (1993) Western Arid Region Land Use Study, Part 5. Technical
Bulletin No. 30, Division of Land Utilisation, Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane
Turton SM and Freiburger HJ (1997) Edge and aspect effects on the microclimate of a small tropical forest remnant on
the Atherton Tableland, Northeast Australia, Tropical Forest Remnants, WF Laurance and R.O. Bierregaard (eds),
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 45-54.
Van Waegeningh HG (1981) A proposal for the dimensions of protection areas, The Science of the Total Environment,
21:397-403
Vanderwoude C (1993) Direct Seeding: Reducing Cost and Inputs of Revegetation in South East Queensland, Submitted in
partial fulfilment of Bachelor of Applied Science (Honours), Charles Sturt University
Virtual Consulting Group and Griffin nrm P/L (2000) National Investment in Rural Landscapes. An Investment Scenario for
NFF and ACF with the Assistance of LWRDDC, Virtual Consulting Group and Griffin nrm P/L, Canberra
Vitelli JS (1992) Fire, The Control and management of Rubber Vine, B Shepherd (ed), Dalrymple Landcare Committee,
Charters Towers, Queensland
Voller P and Eddie C (1995) The influence of possum and cockatoo damage on tree decline in drought affected riparian
forests of the upper Condamine river, south Queensland, Proceedings of the 10th Australian Vertebrate Pest Control
Conference Hobart May 1995, Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, Hobart
Walker KF (1993) Issues in riparian ecology of large rivers, Ecology and Management of Riparian Zones in Australia,
SE Bunn, BJ Pusey and B Price (eds), LWRRDC Occasional Paper Series No. 05/93. Land and Water Resources Research
and Development Corporation, Canberra, pp. 31-40
Walker J, Moore RM and Robertson JA (1972) Herbage response to tree and shrub thinning in Eucalyptus populnea
shrub woodlands, Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 23:405-410
Walker J, Robertson JA, Penridge LK and Sharpe PJJ (1986) Herbage response to tree thinning in a Eucalyptus crebra
woodland, Australian Journal of Ecology, 11:135-140
Wallace KJ and Moore SA (1987) Management of remnant bushland for nature conservation in agricultural areas of
South western AustraliaOperational and planning perspectives, Nature Conservation: The role of remnants of native
vegetation, DA Saunders, GW Arnold, AA Burbridge, AJM Hopkins (ed), Surrey, Beatty and Sons Pty Ltd in association
with CSIRO and CALM, Sydney
162
Walpole SC (1999) Assessment of the economic and ecological impacts of remnant vegetation on pasture productivity,
Pacific Conservation Biology, 5(1):28-35
Walpole S and Lockwood M (1999) Catchment Benefits of Remnant Native Vegetation Conservation, Johnstone Centre Report
No 129, Johnstone Centre, Albury
Walton C (1999) Queensland Parthenium Strategy, Queensland Department Natural Resources, Brisbane
Wells KF (1974) Pasture and Forest: The Situation in North-western NSW, Research Technical Memorandum No. 74/6,
CSIRO Division of Land Use, CSIRO, Melbourne
Wessels KJ, Freitag S and van Jaarsveld AS (1999) The use of land facets as biodiversity surrogates during reserve
selection at a local scale, Biological Conservation, 89:21-38
Westoby M, Walker BH and Noy-Meir I (1989) Opportunistic management for rangelands not at equilibrium, Journal
of Range Management, 42:266-274
Weston EJ, Harbison J, Leslie JK, Rosenthal KM and Mayer RJ (1981) Assessment of the agricultural and pastoral potential of
Queensland, Technical Report No 27, Queensland Department of Primary Industries Agriculture Branch, Brisbane
Whish-Wilson P and Shafron W (1997) Loddon and Campaspe Catchments: Costs of Salinity and High Water Tables to Farms
and Other Businesses, ABARE Report to the Murray Darling Basin Commission. ABARE, Canberra
White ME (1997a) Listen...our land is crying: Australias environment: problems and solutions, Kangaroo Press, NSW
White RE (1997b) Principles and Practice of Soil Science: The Soil as a Natural Resource, Third edition, Blackwell Science,
Oxford
White D (1999) Trees as water pumps tapping two soil levels, Agroforestry News, 8(4):29
Whitmore TC (1997) Tropical forest disturbance, disappearance, and species loss, Tropical Forest Remnants,
WF Laurance and RO Bierregaard (eds), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 3-12
Wildin JH (1986) Tree Leucaena: Top Feed, Shade and Fertiliser Too, RQR86003, QDPI, Rockhampton
Willers B (1994) Sustainable development: a new world deception, Conservation Biology, 8(4):1146-48
Williams KAW (1979) Native Plants of Queensland, Volume 1, K Williams, Ipswich
Williams J (1990) Search for sustainability: Agriculture and its place in the natural ecosystem, Agriculture and the
Ecosystem in North Queensland: Proceedings of a Symposium, Townsville AIAS Occasional Publication No. 51, pp. 21-35
Williams A (1991) Climate Change in the Southeast of Western Australia, BSc Honours thesis, Environmental Science,
Murdoch University
Williams R (1995) The south west strategy: An integrated regional adjustment and recovery program for south west
Queensland and the Western Division of New South Wales, Ecological research and management in the Mulga Lands,
M Page and T Beutel (eds), University of Queensland, Gatton College, pp. 13-18
Williams J (1998) Australia needs a true blue land system. CSIRO Land and Water News, 2:1-3
Williams, JB and Nadolny C (1981) A survey of eucalypt species involved in New England dieback In KM Old, GA Kile
and CP Ohmart (eds), Eucalypt Dieback in Forests and Woodlands, CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 74-86
Williams J, Bui E, Gardner T, Littleboy M and Probert M (1993) Tree retention and dryland salinity control in the upper
Burdekin catchment of North Queensland, Proceedings of the National Conference for Land Management for Dryland Salinity
Control, Latrobe University Campus, Bendigo
Williams CK, Parer I, Coman BJ, Burley J and Braysher ML (1995) Managing vertebrate pests: Rabbits, Bureau of Resource
Sciences/CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra
Williams J, Bui EN, Gardner EA, Littleboy M and Probert ME (1997) Tree Clearing and Dryland Salinity Hazard in the
Upper Burdekin Catchment of North Queensland, Australian Journal of Soil Research, 335:785-801
Wilson AD (1990) The effect of grazing on Australian ecosystems, Proceedings of Ecological Society of Australia,
16 :235-244
Wilson BA and Clark TW (1995) The Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988: a five-year review of its
implementation, People and Nature Conservation. Perspectives on Private Land Use and Endangered Species Recovery,
A Bennett, G Backhouse and T Clark (eds), Surrey Beatty and Sons Pty Ltd, Chipping-Norton, pp. 87-103
Wilson JR and Wild DWM (1991) Improvement of nitrogen nutrition and grass growth under shading, Forage for
plantation crops, HM Shelto and WW Sturs, ACIAR Proceedings No. 32, Canberra
Wilson AD, Harrington GN and Beale IF (1984) Grazing management, Management of Australias rangelands,
GN Harrington, AD Wilson, MD Young (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne
Wilson JR, Catchpoole VR and Weir KL (1986) Stimulation of growth and nitrogen uptake by shading a rundown green
panic pasture on brigalow clay soil, Tropical Grasslands, 20:134-143
Wilson JR, Hill K, Cameron DM and Shelton MM (1990a) The growth of Paspalum notatum under the shade of a
Eucalyptus grandis plantation canopy or in full sun, Tropical Grasslands, 24:24-38
Wilson AD, Tongway DJ, Graetz RD and Young MD (1990b) Range inventory and monitoring, Management of
Australias Rangelands, GN Harrington, AD Wilson and MD Young (eds), CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 113-127
Wilson BA, Fensham RJ and McCosker J (1999) Threshold Options For Tree Clearing Guidelines: A Case Study From the
Brigalow Belt Biogeographic Region in Queensland, An unpublished discussion paper prepared for The Vegetation
Management Advisory Committee, April 1999
163
Windle J and Cramb RA (1993) Contingent valuation as a guide to environmental policy: An application to the
conservation of natural bushland in Brisbane, Economic Analysis and Policy, 23(2):139-149
Wockner GH and Freebairn DM (1991) Water balance and erosion study on the eastern Darling Downs-an update,
Australian Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 4(1):41-47
Woinarski JCZ (1999) Prognosis and framework for the conservation of biodiversity in rangelands: building on the
north Australian experience, VIth International Rangeland Congress Proceedings Vol. 2, pp. 639-645
Woinarski J and Catterall C (1999) Bird records reveal long history of decline, Savanna Links Newsletter of the
Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Development of Tropical Savannas, Darwin, 11 SeptemberOctober 1999, pp. 4-5
Wollast R and McKenzie FT (1989) Global Biogeochemical Cycles and Climate, D Reidel Publishing Company, Boston
Woods LE (1983) Land Degradation in Australia, AGPS, Canberra
World Commission on Environment and Development (1990) Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report), Oxford
University Press, Oxford
Wylie FR (1984) Dieback investigations in Queensland, Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on the Decline of Trees
in the Rural Landscapefocus on farm trees 2, AJ Hofler (ed) University of New England, New South Wales
Wylie FR (1986) Native Tree Dieback in Southern Qld: Its Occurrence, Severity and Aetiology, PhD Thesis, University of Qld,
St Lucia
Wylie FR and Bevege DI (1981) Eucalypt diebacks in Queensland, Eucalypt Dieback in Forests and Woodlands, CSIRO,
Melbourne
Wylie FR and Johnston (1984) Rural tree dieback, Queensland Agricultural Journal, 110:3-6
Wylie FR, Johnston PJM and Forster B (1993) Decline in Casuarina and Eucalyptus in the Mary River Catchment, Queensland
Forestry Service Research Paper
Yachi S and Loreau M (1999) Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity in a fluctuating environment: The insurance
hypothesis, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 96:1463-1468
Yates CJ and Hobbs RJ (1997) Temperate eucalypt woodlands: a review of their status, processes threatening their
persistence and techniques for restoration, Australian Journal of Botany, 45:949-973
Yee Yet J, Silburn DM and McKeon G (1999) Cover-runoff equations to improve simulation of runoff in pasture growth
models, IVth International Rangelands Congress, July 1999, Townsville, Australia
York A (1998) Impacts of Grazing and Burning on Forest Biodiversity: Second Report to the Resource and Conservation
Assessment Council, Key Centre for Biodiversity and Bioresources, Macquarie University, Sydney
Young A (1989) Agroforestry for Soil Conservation, CAB International, Wallingford, UK
Young A (1997) Effects of trees on soils, Amelioration of Soil by Trees: A Review of Current Concepts and Practices,
RT Prinsley and MJ Swift (eds), Commonwealth Secretariat, London
Young MD, Gunningham N, Elix J, Lambert J, Howard B, Grabosky P and McCrone E (1996) Reimbursing the Future. An
Evaluation of Motivational, Voluntary, Price-Based, Property-Right, and Regulatory Incentives for the Conservation of Biodiversity,
Biodiversity series, paper no. 9, Biodiversity Unit, Department of Sport and Territories, Canberra
Zeller B (1998) Queenslands Fisheries Habitats: Current Condition and Recent Trends, Department of Primary Industries,
Queensland
164
return to contents
Appendixes
123
Appendix 1
Overview of the bioregions of Queensland
The bioregions of Queensland group the State into

areas with broadly similar landscape patterns.
These areas provide a useful context for assessing
the natural resources of the State. Following is a
general overview of the regions including major
geology, landform, soils, the characteristic native
vegetation and ecosystems and the dominant land
tenure and use that the regions support
(summarised from Sattler & Williams 1999).
1. Northwest Highlands
The NorthWest Highlands bioregion lies in the far
north-west of the State adjoining the Northern
Territory border. The region is characterised by
stony hills and ranges, often formed from old,
heavily folded sediments or limestone. The
dominant vegetation type is the ubiquitous snappy
gum (Eucalyptus leucophloia) in open woodlands
with a spinifex Triodia spp. ground layer. Sand
sheets overlying older rocks occur at the foot of the
ranges, particularly along the south-western edge
of the region. These areas support E. leucophloia
and other eucalyptus open woodlands. Rivers, and
associated sandy and clayey floodplains drain the
region south into the Mitchell Grass Downs, or
north into the Gulf Plains, and support a range of
open woodland shrublands and open
grassforblands. Areas of gidgee (Acacia cambagei)
shrubland occur scattered across the region on
alluvium or clay soils derived from underlying
Cretaceous sediments.
The major land uses within the NorthWest
Highlands are mining and extensive cattle grazing.
The region is sparsely populated. Due to the low
and erratic rainfall, trees are cleared mainly for
routine management purposes.
2. Gulf Plains
The Gulf Plains bioregion extends around the
southern and eastern shores of the Gulf of
Carpentaria, between the Northern Territory border
and the Mitchell River. The region is characterised
by the extensive alluvial plains of the large river
systems that drain the area to the northern
coastline. These areas support mainly blue grass
(Dichanthium spp). grasslands and various open
woodlands dominated by species such as coolibah
(E. microtheca), guttapercha (Excoecaria parviflora),
Corymbia spp., gidgee (A. cambagei), paperbark
(Melaleuca spp). and bauhinia (Lysiphyllum
cunninghamii).
124
Along the coast are extensive estuarine areas and

floodplains supporting mangroves, sedgelands and
grasslands and providing important wetland
habitat. Gently sloping sandstone tablelands along
the eastern margin of the region support a variety
of eucalyptus woodlands and lancewood
(A. shirleyi) low, open forests.
The dominant land use of the region is cattle

grazing on native pastures. The region is sparsely
populated. Pastoral leases cover most of the region
and stocking levels are reasonably low. The only
broadacre clearing has occurred in the south,
where gidgee (Acacia cambagei) communities have
been cleared, mainly on clay soils.
3. Cape York Peninsula

The Cape York Peninsula bioregion extends from
the northern tip of Queensland to Cooktown on its
southern border.
The region receives a high, though strongly
seasonal (summer) rainfall. Much of the region is
dominated by gently undulating plains and plateaus
with sandy earth, relatively deep, but low nutrient
status soils. The dominant vegetation is savanna
woodlands; typically Darwin stringybark (Eucalyptus
tetrodonta) and related Eucalyptus spp. with a tall
grass understorey. Lower lying areas often support
paperbark (Melaleuca viridiflora) woodlands. Closer
to the coast there are estuarine and alluvial plains
supporting a range of mangroves, wetlands, vine
forests, fringing woodlands, grasslands and a
diverse array of other coastal formations. Mainly
sandstone, but also older volcanic geologies form
ranges and low hills supporting various Eucalyptus
spp. and Corymbia spp. woodlands and scattered,
mixed species vine forests.
Pastoral leases, conservation reserves and Deed of
Grant in Trust (Aboriginal land) cover most of the
region. The region is considered to be in a relatively
natural state with the dominant land uses being
cattle grazing on native pastures, tourism, nature
conservation, support for traditional Aboriginal life
and some mining. Broadscale clearing for more
intensive agricultural management is not
appropriate.
4. Mitchell Grass Downs

The Mitchell Grass Downs bioregion occurs in a
horizontal band across the largely semiarid central
west of Queensland. The region is dominated by
undulating plains with deep, heavy, clay soils
formed from the underlying Cretaceous shales.
These areas support mainly Mitchell grass (Astrebla
spp). tussock grasslands (the downs) sometimes
with a low tree layer of gidgee (Acacia cambagei)
and other species (the wooded downs).
The undulating plains are drained by several river
systems, south into the Channel Country bioregion
or north to the Gulf Plains and the ocean. The
associated floodplains support a range of coolibah
(E. coolabah) woodlands and grasslandsforblands.
Low, dissected, deeply-weathered residuals with
shallow soils supporting a range of sparse acacia
or cassia shrublands are also scattered across the
region.
Most of the region is used extensively for grazing of

sheep and cattle production. Land tenure is mainly
leasehold, with freehold occurring commonly in the
south-east of the region.
5. Channel Country
The Channel Country bioregion occurs in the arid
south-west corner of Queensland. The region is
characterised by the Channel Countrythe vast
(often 1050 km or more wide) braided floodplains
of the Georgina, Eyre, Cooper and Diamantina
rivers and creeks, which supply most of the water
in the land locked Eyre Basin to the south-west.
These river systems support a range of herbfields,
grasslands, terminal swamps, claypans, lakes and
fringing eucalypt woodlands.
Wetlands in these areas provide important
ephemeral habitat for enormous water-bird
populations. The floodplains are surrounded by
undulating gravel or stone (gibber) covered plains
supporting Mitchell Grass (Astrebla spp.) grassland
and forblands. Further away are low dissected
residuals, which support a range of acaciasenna
sparse shrubland communities. In the south-west
of the region, but also scattered across it, are sand
dunes and plains supporting sparse spinifex
hummock grasslands and an arid desert flora
and fauna.
The dominant industry in the region is cattle
grazing, with smaller areas used for mining and
tourism.
6. Mulga Lands
The Mulga Lands bioregion occurs in the semiarid
central south of Queensland. The region is
dominated by flat, to gently undulating plains, with
low nutrient status red earth soils derived from
Quaternary deposits. These areas support mainly
mulga (Acacia aneura) shrubland and woodlands.
Low, dissected, highly-weathered hills with shallow
stony soils support Acacia spp. shrublands. Poplar
box (Eucalyptus populnea) woodlands occur on
lower-lying alluvial areas or in the eastern parts of
the region, across the surrounding plains as a
co-dominant with mulga. More fertile and moist
areas supporting coolibah (E. coolabah) woodlands
and Mitchell Grass (Astrebla spp.) herb grasslands
are scattered across the region, associated with the
floodplains of major rivers and smaller drainage
lines. Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla), in the east, and
gidgee (Acacia cambagei) woodlands or shrublands
are also scattered across the region, occurring on
alluvial soils or soils produced from underlying
Cretaceous shales.
Most of the land in the region is used for cattle and
sheep grazing. Intensive land clearing is more
common in the eastern parts of the region. Land
tenure is mainly leasehold, although freehold
tenures are more common towards the eastern part
of the region and the Warrego River floodplain in
the central south.
7. Wet Tropics
The Wet Tropics bioregion is situated along the
tropical east coast of northern Queensland. The
region is dominated by rugged mountain ranges,
which include the highest mountains in
Queensland. These areas are formed from granites
and other old sediments and meta-sediments. The
mountains, and some of the associated lower hills
and undulating plains, which receive a high and
consistent rainfall, often support an extremely
diverse array of the lush, complex, tropical
mesophyll rainforest and vine forests which
characterise the region.
Above the mountains, along the western edge of
the region, are extensive plateau areas with basaltderived, fertile, soils that support both rainforests
and eucalyptus forests. Below the mountains are
low-lying coastal plains that support eucalyptus
and melaleuca woodlands. Mangroves, samphire,
beach vine forests and other communities occur on
the saline estuarine plains and adjacent coastal
landscapes.
Clearing is largely restricted to the plateau areas
where small cropping and dairying are the major
land uses, and to the coastal lowlands, where sugar
cane production is the major industry. Tourism and
nature conservation are major land uses for the
World Heritage listed rainforest areas of the region.
8. Central Queensland Coast

The Central Queensland Coast bioregion is centred
upon the high rainfall coastal lowlands, hills and
ranges around Byfield in the south, and
CarmillaProserpine in the north. Subcoastal and
coastal rugged ranges and lower hills support
broad-leaved evergreen, rain and vine forests or a
range of eucalyptus and corymbia forests and
woodlands. The lower-lying coastal and alluvial
plains support a series of melaleuca and
eucalyptus dominated woodlands. Adjacent to the
coast, mangroves and samphire occur on saline
estuarine deposits. Eucalyptus, banksia and
melaleuca woodlands and wetlands occur on
coastal sand and dune complexes.
The major land uses include sugar cane on the
lower lying alluvial and adjacent plains and cattle
grazing. Flatter parts of the region have been
cleared extensively for agriculture.
9. Einasleigh Uplands
The Einasleigh Uplands bioregion straddles the
Great Dividing Range in inland north-east
Queensland. The region is mainly undulating to
hilly, with some rugged ranges and plateaus. Most
of the region is covered in eucalyptus woodlands;
common species include E. drepanophylla, E. crebra,
E. microneura, E. cullenii and E. brownii. Low hills
and ranges support bendee (A. catenulata)
lancewood (A. shirleyi) open forest, or eucalyptus
125
low open woodlands. Tertiary lava flows are a

distinctive and common component of the southern
half of the region. These areas support ironbark
woodlands, vine thickets and smaller but distinctive
lake and seasonally flooded vegetation communities.
Most of the region is leasehold land, although areas
of freehold are widespread in some parts such as
the area near Charters Towers. The major land use
is extensive grazing, although cropping is locally
significant. Clearing is largely restricted to freehold
land, usually for cropping or horticultural purposes.
10. Desert Uplands

The Desert Uplands bioregion lies in central
northern Queensland, straddling the Great Dividing
Range between Blackall and Pentland. The region is
dominated by sand plains supporting eucalyptus
open woodlands; widespread dominant species
include E. similis, E. whitei, E. melanophloia and
E. populnea/brownii. Low sandstone ranges carry a
variety of eucalyptus woodlands and lancewood
(Acacia shirleyi) and bendee (A. catenulata) low,
open forests.
More fertile clay soils derived from alluvium,
Cainozoic clay deposits or underlying Cretaceous
sediments support gidgee (Acacia cambagei), black
gidgee (A. argyrodendron) and some brigalow
(A. harpophylla) and Mitchell Grass (Astrebla spp.)
grasslands. Large, ephemeral lake systems and their
associated surrounding dunes support fringing
coolibah (E. coolabah) woodlands, shrublands,
sedgelands and grasslands. These wetlands provide
important seasonal waterbird habitat.
Extensive cattle grazing is the dominant land use of
this region, although clearing for more intensive
cattle production is becoming more widespread.
Clearing has focused on the heavier soils carrying
acacia communities. However, clearing has recently
extended into the eucalypt woodlands on the
infertile sand plains in the south-east part of the
region.
11. Brigalow Belt

The Brigalow Belt bioregion covers much of the
500750 mm per annum rainfall country that runs
in a subcoastal belt between the QueenslandNew
South Wales border and Townsville. The region
encompasses a wide range of geologies and
associated landforms. As its name suggests, the
region is characterised by the main area of
distribution of the leguminous tree brigalow (Acacia
harpophylla), which occurs on flat, to undulating
plains, with deep clay soils derived from Cretaceous
sediments, more recent Cainozoic deposits and
older volcanic rocks.
126
A wide range of other ecosystems and land forms

also occurs in the region. Ironbark (Eucalyptus
crebra) and a range of other species, and
bloodwood (Corymbia spp) forest and woodlands
occur on the rugged ranges and hills formed from
sandstone or older folded sediments that crisscross

the region. Cypress pine (Callitris glaucophylla)
woodland and/or poplar box (E. populnea), and
silver-leafed ironbark (E. melanophloia) woodlands
are common on slopes and plains with sandy or at
least texture-contrast soils. Grasslands occur on
flat plains with clay soils derived from alluvium,
Cretaceous sediments or basalts. Alluvial plains
with clay or sandy soils support a range of
eucalypt woodlands. Softwood scrub (dry
rainforest) communities and heathlands are found
in scattered pockets across the region. Estuarine
plains with mangrove forest and samphire
communities occur in parts of the region adjacent
to the coast.
The Brigalow Belt is a major agricultural and
pastoral area and tree clearing has been a
widespread practice, particularly as part of land
development schemes since the late 1950s, and is
still substantial in the region (see section 2.0).
12. Southeast Queensland

The Southeast Queensland bioregion extends from
the New South Wales border, north to Bundaberg.
The region contains a wide range of habitat types.
Perhaps the most common are hilly to mountainous
areas supporting spotted gum (C. citriodora) and
Eucalyptus spp. open forests and woodlands.
Basalt-derived rugged ranges and hills
characteristically support complex notophyll and
araucarian microphyll rain forests and tall open
forests. The lower lying coastal plains include large
areas of marine, alluvial and the very distinctive
large sand areas (Fraser, Moreton etc). These areas
support a range of communities including
heathlands, banksia woodlands, mangroves and
sedgelands, paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia)
open forests and blackbutt (E. pilularis), scribbly
gum (E. racemosa) and other eucalyptus woodlands
and open forests.
The region is highly populated and has been
extensively cleared for agriculture and urban
purposes. Most of the region is freehold. Small
areas of leasehold land used for agricultural
purposes occur in the north and west of the region.
13. New England Tableland

The New England Tableland bioregion is
distinguished by its high altitude (>800 m) and
geology (predominantly granite and traprock
Devonian and sedimentary, often metamorphosed,
rocks). The main landforms are mountains,
tablelands and hills separated by broad valleys.
Vegetation is mainly eucalyptus woodland and
open forest with localised montane heaths and
swamps. Common dominant tree species include
New England blackbutt (E. andrewsii), tumbledown
gum (E. dealbata), New England peppermint
(E. noveahollandiae), yellow box (E. melliodora) and
ironbarks (E. crebra) and (E. sideroxylon).
The major land uses of the region include fruit and

vegetable production, wool growing, cattle grazing
and tourism. Horticulture has resulted in the
retention of a greater proportion of natural
vegetation cover. Most of the flatter country has
been cleared and much of the remaining natural
vegetation occurs along the ridgelines.
127
Appendix 2
Description of land types (native

pasture communities)
Weston et al. (1981) have produced a map of native

pasture that is widely used in Queensland to make
general assessments about capability, degradation
and other land resource related issues. A brief
statement is given here on each of the 14 native
pasture communities. The characteristic ground
cover grasses and the dominant tree species are
indicated.
1. Pastures sparse or absent

Closed forests and two coastal communities,
namely rainforest, littoral and heath, are grouped
together because they have limited usefulness for
animal production in the natural state. The total
area they cover is 4 400 000 ha. Rainforest has few
grasses until cleared when Melinis minutiflora,
Pennisetum clandestinum, Paspalum dilatatum and
Axonopus affinis may become naturalised.
Although the littoral areas contain a rich ground
flora, pastures of Spinifex hirsutus have a low
productive value. The exception to this is on some
tidal flats where valuable seasonal grazing is
obtained from Sporobolus virginicus. The sedge
Schoenus sparteus occurs as a characteristic species
on the heath of Cape York Peninsula.
Prominent soils in the rainforest areas are friable
earths and fertile loams; in littoral zones they are
plastic clays and texture contrast soils with gleyed
clayey subsoils; and in heath areas, infertile earths.
While black speargrass occurs on almost all soil

types, 70% of its area is confined to infertile
texture-contrast soils and earths. The remainder
occurs on more fertile soils (duplex, loam, and
clay) and is thus subject to replacement by sown
pasture species or crops.
Most areas in the south have been cleared to some
extent, some extensively, by tree ringbarking and
poisoning.
4. Queensland bluegrass
Dichanthium sericeum grasslands occur on limited
(2 400 000 ha) areas of fertile cracking clays in
southern (Darling Downs) and central (Central
Highlands) Queensland. Rainfall averages between
600 mm and 700 mm annually.
Characteristic species in southern Queensland are
D. sericeum, D. affine and Aristida leptopoda, while
Bothriochloa erianthoides, D. sericeum, D. affine,
A. leptopoda, A. latifolia and Astrebla spp. occur in
the Central Highlands.
Much of this grassland community is cultivated
for crops.
2. Bladygrass
5. Brigalow pastures
A composite of northern and southern sandy

coastal lowlands, these open forest and woodland
communities cover an area of only 2 700 000 ha
and generally receive more than 1100 mm of rainfall
annually. The major trees in the north are
Eucalyptus platyphylla, Corymbia dallachiana and
bloodwoods; and in the south, E. signata,
bloodwoods and Melaleuca spp. The characteristic
grasses are Themeda triandra and Imperata cylindrica
with Heteropogon triticeus associated in the north and
A. affinis in the south. Intensive use is not possible
in the absence of expensive land development.
Flat, to gently undulating brigalow forests, and

open forests occupy 8 700 000 ha of largely fertile,
sometimes gilgaied heavy clays that occur to the
west of the black spear grass in central and
southern Queensland. The dominant tree in this
area is Acacia harpophylla, which is associated with
several other trees. Casuarina cristata is often
co-dominant and on some soils it may be
dominant. Although clearing by axe was started
around 1900, accelerated development has
occurred over only the past 40 years with the use
of heavy machinery for land clearing.
Soils are infertile, mostly with a shallow A horizon

and an impervious B horizon in the duplex profiles.
Pasture species (Paspalidium spp.) were sparse before

clearing. Following tree removal, and in the absence
of species introduction, native pasture communities
based on Chloris, Paspalidium, Dichanthium,
Sporobolus and Eragrostis spp. developed.
3. Black speargrass
Black speargrass (Heteropogon contortus) is the most
extensive native pasture community in the humid
and subhumid zones. It occupies 25 000 000 ha
and for the most part receives between 700 mm
and 1200 mm of rainfall annually. Woodlands and
open forests of Eucalyptus spp. (E. crebra,
C. citriodora, E. tereticornis, and C. tessellaris) occur in
coastal and subcoastal areas along the eastern
128
seaboard from Cooktown to the QueenslandNew

South Wales border. Induced by management
practices, H. contortus is the most characteristic
species, although Bothriochloa bladhii and T. triandra
are dominant in some parts of the community.
Sixty per cent of brigalow pasture soils are uniform

clays of moderate to good fertility. A further 27%
are texture contrast soils of moderate fertility. Very
high levels of production immediately following
development have declined in brigalow pastures,
but these pasture systems remain productive
compared with others in the State. Long-term landuse trends in this native pasture community are
towards greater areas of cultivation at the expense

of sown and native pastures, especially on clay
soils and in southern areas. The use of leucaena
(Leucaena leucocephala) is providing a significant
boost to animal production in the northern half of
the zone.
6. AristidaBothriochloa pastures
This community is a composite of eight types in
which either Aristida or Bothriochloa spp. are
prominent. It occupies 33 500 000 ha of semiarid
woodlands that surround, and in places form a
mosaic with brigalow in central and southern
Queensland. It occurs as an unbroken community
in north Queensland. Infertile earths, texturecontrast and sandy soils comprise 89% of the area.
In many pastures, Aristida has been a major
increaser. Land use is predominantly sheep and
cattle grazing at relatively low stocking rates,
except in the granitetraprock area where rates are
higher. The small proportion of better soils (11%)
have potential for forage cropping.
The component vegetation zones are:
Western slopes of Einasleigh uplands: woodlands
of E. microneura developed on infertile sandy soils
with Aristida spp. and Chrysopogon fallax
prominent.
Paperbarked tea-tree: (Melaleuca spp.) low
woodlands occurring on infertile earths and
duplex soils with Aristida spp. and C. fallax as
characteristic grasses. Low grazing pressures
have left these pastures in good condition.
Lancewood: woodlands of Acacia shirleyi with a
very sparse ground cover of Triodia pungens and
Aristida spp. occupying dissected plateau areas
with skeletal soils. The level of use is low.
Dissected sandstone hills: a range of forest or
woodland communities occurring on dissected
sandstone hills. Eucalyptus spp. form layered
woodlands with grasses such as Cymbopogon
refractus, Aristida spp., Themeda triandra,
Arundinella spp. and Triodia mitchellii. Acacia open
forests with A. catenulata and A. shirleyi have
Aristida caput-medusae, Cleistochloa subjuncea,
Dimorphochloa rigida, Cymbopogon refractus and
Arundinella spp. as characteristic grasses.
Aristida spp. increase with disturbance.
Poplar box-mulga: woodlands of E. populnea with
an understorey of Acacia aneura, Geijera parviflora
and sometimes Eremophila mitchellii occur on
deep red earth plains. Grasses commonly
encountered are Aristida spp. and Thyridolepis
mitchelliana. Sheep and cattle grazing have
promoted the increase of Aristida and probably
contributed to increased densities of woody
plants.
Semiarid woodland plains and low hills:

woodlands of Eucalyptus populnea and Eremophila
mitchellii with G. parviflora develop on alluvial
material and are often associated with drainage
lines. Soils are duplexes of moderate fertility.
Chloris spp. are important grasses, and with
development and use, Bothriochloa and
Aristida spp. become prominent. Heavy sheep
and cattle grazing in the past has promoted
Aristida spp. and probably contributed to
increased densities of woody plants.
Southern sandy country: there are two distinct
community types contained in this vegetation
zone. The first is the open forest of Callitris
columellaris and Casuarina leuhmannii that occurs
on infertile sandy duplex soils (solodics) and
contains a native pasture of Aristida and
Eragrostis as characteristic genera.The second
is the temperate woodland community that
extends northward from New South Wales into
the southern Darling Downs and is locally
known as the granitetraprock country. It
contains a large range of eucalyptus species.
While subtropical woodland grasses such as
Bothriochloa decipiens and B. macra occur,
temperate grasses such as Stipa scabra and
Danthonia spp. are also prominent.
Cypress pine: deep, sandy, duplex soils support
Callitris glaucophylla woodlands with a variety of
Eucalyptus spp. and sometimes with Allocasuarina
leuhmannii. Native pastures are very sparse and
contain Aristida spp. and Cymbopogon refractus as
characteristic grasses. Densities of cypress pine
have increased considerably in the absence of fire.
7. Gidgee pastures
A total area of 4 800 000 ha probably
underestimates the extent of gidgee (Acacia
cambagei) and Georgina gidgee (A. georginae). As
rainfall decreases, gidgee replaces brigalow on the
heavier soils and scattered occurrences on the
margins of both brigalow forests and Astrebla spp.
grasslands may not be recorded as distinct
communities. Gidgee stands in the latter grasslands
have increased in density and in area in recent
decades. Georgina gidgee is restricted to northwest Queensland.
Dense stands of Acacia cambagei in the central west
had only a sparse ground flora until modified by
land clearing. Subsequently, stands of Cenchrus
ciliaris thrive on high available nitrogen and even in
the long term appear well adapted. They support
greatly increased stocking rates of sheep and cattle.
Characteristic native grasses are B. ewartiana and
Dichanthium affine while Astrebla spp., Eragrostis
setifolia, E. parviflora and Chloris pectinate occur in
low, open gidgee woodlands in the south-west.
Woodland communities of Acacia georginae support
species of the astrebla grasslands.
129
While most commonly occurring on clay soils,

gidgee pastures are also found on loams, earths
and duplex soils.
8. Mulga pastures
The semiarid woodlands give way to mulga (Acacia
aneura) woodlands and shrublands on the poorer
and lighter soils. Both summer and winter rainfall
appear necessary to maintain mulga and the plant
is absent from semiarid regions with regular
summer or winter drought. Structurally, mulga
associations range from open forests to sparse, tall
open shrublands. They occupy 19 100 000 ha of
south-west and central western Queensland.
Many spinifex pastures are grazed only in

conjunction with better-quality associated land
systems. Alternatively, they are reserved for
drought grazing with the aid of supplements.
11. Channel Country pastures

The broad network of channels and enclosed flats
of the Diamantina, Georgina and Bulloo Rivers and
Cooper and Eyre Creeks form the Channel Country
of the south-west. The area involved is
5 400 000 ha of clay soils with Eucalyptus coolabah
and E.camaldulensis fringing the main channels.
Muehlenbeckia cunninghamii is associated with
depressions.
Characteristic genera are Aristida, Thyridolepis,

Eriachne, Digitaria and Eragrostis, not necessarily
occurring in the same communities. The presence
of Acacia aneura as a drought fodder has been
invaluable for the maintenance of stock, but has
contributed directly to the over-utilisation of native
pasture species.
Valuable forage appears after flooding of the

channels and flats. The genera Echinochloa,
Chenopodium, Trigonella, Iseilema, Panicum,
Sclerolaena, Dactyloctenium and Atriplex are common
depending on when flooding occurs.
Eighty per cent of soils are infertile earths, texturecontrast soils, or sands.
12. Bluegrassbrowntop
9. Mitchell grass
The astrebla grasslands are the most extensive and
the most valuable of Queenslands inland native
pastures. They occupy an area of 29 500 000 ha
between the 250 mm and 500 mm isohyets. On
suitable soils receiving less than 250 mm of annual
rainfall in the far west, astrebla occurs only during
sequences of high rainfall years. These areas are
more frequently occupied by chenopod herbfields.
In flooded areas, Eucalyptus coolabah and
E. camaldulensis fringe drainage lines.
Four Astrebla spp. (A. lappacea, A. elymoides,
A. pectinata, and A. squarrosa) are widespread and
occur as tussock grasslands of low basal cover
(24%). The interspaces are occupied by a range of
annual grasses and forbs (Iseilema, Dactyloctenium,
Brachyachne, Amaranthus, Salsola, and Portulaca spp.).
The astrebla grasslands occur on heavy textured
soils, 90% being cracking clay and the remainder
fertile duplex soils. High temperatures and the lack
of shade are husbandry problems. The spread of
the introduced woody weed, prickly acacia (Acacia
nilotica) onto 6 000 000 ha of these grasslands has
led to serious management problems in northern
areas. Other species causing similar concerns
include mesquite (Prosopis) and parkinsonia
(Parkinsonia aculeata), and the native mimosa
(Mimosa farnesiana) (Reynolds & Carter 1993).
10. Spinifex
Triodia, Eriachne and Zygochloa are characteristic
species of 21 200 000 ha of poor quality,
hummockh native pastures occurring as grasslands
and under acacia and eucalypt (Eucalyptus
melanophloia and E. leucophloia) woodlands. Soils
130
are sands, loams and duplex soils and are

consistently infertile.
The treeless plains of the lower Gulf of Carpentaria

support 5 600 000 ha of Dichanthium
fecundumEulalia aurea grasslands. Associated
genera are Astrebla, Sorghum, Aristida, Chrysopogon
and Iseilema. The community occurs between the
500 mm and 800 mm isohyets and rain falls mainly
in the summer. Cracking clays predominate, but
these differ from the fertile grey and brown clays of
the astrebla grasslands in their lower fertility and
low percentage of plant-available water capacity.
13. Schizachyrium
The lands of Cape York Peninsula are the least
developed for pastoral use in the State. This is a
reflection of the poor quality of the available forage.
Ground cover species vary throughout the area.
The most widespread community is Eucalyptus
tetrodonta open forest that supports Heteropogon
triticeus, Schizachyrium fragile, Panicum mindanaense
and Eriachne stipacea.
In the central north, woodlands of E. tetrodonta
support Sorghum plumosum pastures while
H. triticeus, Rhynchospora longisetis,
Pseudopogonantherum contortum and Bothriochloa
bladhii occur, but are less abundant.
Melaleuca viridiflora is conspicuous in the lower tree
stratum in some forests and woodlands and is the
dominant tree species in low, open woodlands on
the western peninsula. In this community, the bulk
of the ground cover consists of annual grasses
(Aristida spp., Eriachne burkittii, Schizachyrium spp.
and Ischaemum baileyi).
Low eucalypt woodlands on the eastern peninsula
have ground cover of H. triticeus, E. glauca, S. fragile
and Thaumastochloa spp. or H. triticeus and Sorghum
plumosum. The heath communities of the
northeast have Schoenus sparteus as the common

ground species.
More than 90% of soils are infertile earths, duplex
soils, sands and loams.
14. Native sorghum

Extending over 1 000 000 ha of E. tetrodonta
woodlands in the northern part of Cape York, the
native sorghum community provides one of the
better grazing lands of the Peninsula. Annual
rainfall of 1200 mm is reliable.
Sorghum plumosum is the common grass species,
though H. triticeus, Rhynchospora longisetis,
Pseudopogonantherum contortum and Bothriochloa
bladhii occur, but are less abundant.
131
Appendix 3
Queensland Herbarium vegetation and regional

ecosystem survey and mapping program
Area of Queensland covered by

regional scale vegetation/ecosystem
mapping
By June 2000, preclearing and 19951997 remnant
ecosystem mapping will be completed for most of
the Brigalow Belt, Desert Uplands, Queensland
Central Coast, Southeast Queensland, the southeastern Mitchell Grass Downs, Mulga Lands east of
the Warrego River floodplain and some of the
Einasleigh Uplands bioregions. In addition,
preclearing vegetation and regional ecosystem
mapping is available for Cape York Peninsula, the
Channel Country and most of the Mitchell Grass
Downs and the Mulga Lands regions.
Mapping Methods
Preclearing vegetation
Preclearing vegetation communities are delineated
on 1960s aerial photos with the aid of any available
land system, geology, soils and other land resource
mapping. These aerial photos are used as they
constitute the earliest uniform State-wide coverage.
This lessens the amount of disturbance to photo
patterns compared with present day photos.
Photo interpretation is followed by extensive field
sampling, ground truthing and collection of
quantitative site data. This information is then
collated and analysed and photo patterns are
attributed with vegetation and ecosystem types.
Where it is evident from the aerial photography that
vegetation has been substantially cleared,
extrapolations are made from remnant vegetation to
cleared areas using landform and photo patterns. If
available, other land resource maps, older air photos
and old land surveyproperty records held by the
Department of Natural Resources are also used.
Remnant vegetation
An unambiguous definition of remnant vegetation is
difficult because there is a continuum between
remnants, regrowth, thinned and cleared
vegetation. For example, one definition of regrowth
vegetation is all lignotubers, suckers, re-sprouting
stumps, seedlings etc. of woody vegetation that
develops in response to removal of the woody
canopy by clearing and/or thinning by humans
(i.e. not through storms, fires etc). This definition
would include areas that have received partial or
light thinning or logging, or areas that had been
cleared or thinned many years ago and which have
regrown to their original height and cover. Such
areas are likely to have biodiversity and other
values equal to those of remnant vegetation that
has never been logged, thinned or cleared. Another
132
definition (New South Wales Department of Land

and Water Conservation 1997) which uses set age
and/or height cut-offs to define remnant vegetation,
does not allow for the fact that different vegetation
types will regrow at different rates, and attain
different height canopies.
Therefore, the Queensland Herbarium has defined
remnant intact vegetation as that which has at
least 70% of the height and 50% of the cover of the
dominant stratum, relative to the normal height and
cover of that stratum. Normal vegetation is
generally considered to be vegetation that has not
been subjected to gross mechanical or chemical
disturbance of the dominant stratum. These
threshold figures were based on the variation of
height and cover of remnant vegetation around the
mean height and cover figures (as indicated from
site data and field survey). Vegetation that has
been cleared in the past, but now has canopy
height and cover above this threshold, appears to
generally possess much of the structural and
floristic diversity of other remnant vegetation that
has been subjected to an otherwise similar grazing
and management regime. However, it should be
noted that non-remnant vegetation may also have
high habitat and biodiversity values (section 3.2).
Remnant vegetation is mapped using the latest
Landsat imagery (1997 at April 2000) supplied by
the Department of Natural Resources State
Landcover and Tree Study (SLATS) project, in
conjunction with recent aerial photography and
ground truthing. In practice, remnant vegetation is
defined in the field by locating vegetation,
observation or quantitative survey sites in
undisturbed areas, often on stock routes and
reserves or areas where there has been no obvious
mechanical or chemical disturbance to the
dominant stratum. These areas are used as a
benchmark for determining remnant thresholds in
the field and are related to Landsat image and
aerial photo patterns to enable extrapolation of
remnant vegetation within each vegetation type
across the landscape. Areas that show as cleared
on 1960s photography and have subsequently
regrown, are also used to indicate non-remnant
vegetation, particularly in western Queensland
where growth rates are relatively slow. Mapping of
remnant and non-remnant vegetation is also
related to scale. Areas less than the minimum
mapped area (< 5 ha) mapped by the Queensland
Herbarium, which have less than 50% canopy
cover or 70% height, may be mapped as part of a
larger remnant as the height and cover of the
overall remnant is greater than that of the
threshold.
The finalised remnant map is overlaid with the

preclearing ecosystem map to attach the ecosystem
types to the remnant cover. This is then inspected
by botanists to re-allocate proportions to each
component of mosaic polygons (areas mapped as a
combination of two or more ecosystems) to take
into account clearing that has occurred
differentially across the components of a mosaic
(Fensham et al. 1998).
Limitations, ongoing refinement and use

of survey and mapping
The ecosystemvegetation maps are extrapolations
from site data, observations and remotely sensed
imagery. The line work is generally accurate to
1:100 000 scale mapping that is within 100 m of
where it should be on the ground. For preclearing
mapping, the minimum size of an area mapped is
20 ha, while for remnant land cover mapping, the
minimum size is generally 5 ha clumps or 100 m
linear features (except for south-east Queensland
where the minimum area mapped is 20 ha). In
addition, time and budget constraints mean that
detailed sampling may be at 1:250 000 scale (about
100 detailed sites per map sheet). Variations in the
condition of vegetation within remnant areas are
not mapped.
The survey and mapping aims to achieve a greater
than 80% accuracy of preclearing and remnant
coverage across Queensland. Accuracy will vary
from area to area and vegetation type to vegetation
type. While the mapping gives a good regional
perspective on the distribution and status of
ecosystems, it is expected that property level
inspections and property vegetation management
plans will be used progressively to update the
mapping. This information will be combined with
monitoring of ongoing clearing to periodically
update ecosystem statistics, distribution maps and
the conservation status of regional ecosystems.
133
134

Native Vegetation Management in Queensland

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Native Vegetation Management in Queensland

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Native Vegetation Management in Queensland

Background, Science and Values

Photographs courtesy of Jenny Milson, DPI

Our understanding of ecological processes is

Click on any topic to view it

5. Social and economic issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

This review is an update of a report to the Working

The original report represented the findings of a

In August 1999, the State Liaison and Coordination

This version aims to broadly cover the relevant

Department of Natural Resources

Environmental Protection Agency

Thirteen bioregions have been described for

Clearing of trees releases carbon stored as

The functioning of remnants can be impacted by

brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) . . . . . 57, 65, 67, 72, 75, 80,

ecologically sustainable development (ESD) . . . . . . . 226

Flooded gum (Eucalyptus grandis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 84

participatory approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98, 103

riparian zones (continued)

1.1 Queenslands land and

historic land uses. Agricultural practices are

biodiversity assessments and have been used to

Pre-European settlement vegetation

Prior to European settlement, Aboriginal land use,

structure, composition and diversity of Australias

southern and oceanic hemisphere

circulation patterns, rainfall patterns

landforms and soils

soil type, drainage, nutrient levels

lightning strikes, anthropogenic

Queenslands terrestrial vegetation communities

The importance of these evolutionary factors in

Sheet and rill

Gully and tunnel

Acid soils (pH Ca<4.8)

1.2 Landscape health

Sodic soils or structural decline

The EPA (1999c) identified a number of land

Table 1.4 Overview of relationships between pressures on,

Underlie and/or exacerbate many

- weather and climate

Degraded soils, particularly:

Pest plants and animals

Pest plants and animals

Depletion of forest resources

Depletion of mineral resources

19 communities in Queensland (see table 1.5). This

Table 1.5 Assessment of condition of rangelands in northern

Seasonal riverine plains

Many ecological processes are poorly understood

1.2.1 Rate of clearing

Describing the period between 199597, the DNR

(not threatened Annual

REMNANT AREA BY STATUS BY TENURE

STATUS BY REMNANT AREA (2000) AND ANNUAL CLEARING (19951997)

1.2.2 Current extent of regional

over 650 000 ha of the of concern regional

The amount of remnant vegetation across

Pasture sparse or absent

Figure 1.1 Native pasture communities. Source: DNR.

Native pasture communities

Figure 2.1 Land Tenures in Queensland (1997). Source DNR 1999b.

Land tenure and legislation