Transcript Template title in this size and colour

Determination of the
biodiversity at risk from
lantana invasion
Pete Turner and Paul Downey
Pest Management Unit, Parks and Wildlife Division,
Department of Environment and Climate Change,
PO Box 1967, Hurstville, New South Wales 1481, Australia.
1
managing lantana for biodiversity
given:
• lantana is widespread
• control is not possible across entire range and
• control does not necessarily lead to biodiversity
conservation
2
managing lantana for biodiversity
given:
• lantana is widespread
• control is not possible across entire range and
• control does not necessarily lead to biodiversity
conservation
to get the maximum benefit from our control programs
aimed at protecting biodiversity, we need to undertake
control where the benefits to biodiversity would be the
greatest
3
managing lantana for biodiversity
given:
• lantana is widespread
• control is not possible across entire range and
• control does not necessarily lead to biodiversity
conservation
to get the maximum benefit from our control programs
aimed at protecting biodiversity, we need to undertake
control where the benefits to biodiversity would be the
greatest
this requires information on the biodiversity at risk and
site information
4
key publications to determine biodiversity at risk
• Impacts of weeds on threatened
biodiversity in NSW
 lantana threatens 10% of all
listed species in NSW
 the most commonly
recorded weed threat
5
key publications to determine biodiversity at risk
• Impacts of weeds on threatened
biodiversity in NSW
 lantana threatens 10% of all
listed species in NSW
 the most commonly
recorded weed threat
• Weed Impacts to Native Species
(WINS) assessment process
 Bitou Bush Threat
Abatement Plan
6
talk outline
•
•
•
•
background and overview of NSW Bitou
Threat Abatement Plan (TAP)
how the Bitou TAP is being applied nationally
for lantana
identification of biodiversity at risk (round
table)
mapping and site information
7
the bitou bush experience in NSW
(Chrysanthemoides monilifera)
8
support for the Bitou Threat Abatement Plan (TAP)
1. Bitou TAP positively received
2. NHT funding secured to implement the
Bitou TAP [ $1.6M over 3 years for
implementation]
9
support for the Bitou Threat Abatement Plan (TAP)
1. Bitou TAP positively received
2. NHT funding secured to implement the
Bitou TAP [ $1.6M over 3 years for
implementation]
3. Defeating the Weeds Menace funding
secured to develop and implement a
national lantana strategy based on the
Bitou TAP
10
Key Threatening Process in NSW
Lantana and bitou invasion listed as a key
threatening process in NSW
TAP Objective: abate, ameliorate or eliminate
the threat posed by the KTP to threatened
biodiversity
[ listing process outlined under the TSC Act ]
11
Key Threatening Process in NSW
Lantana and bitou invasion listed as a key
threatening process in NSW
TAP Objective: abate, ameliorate or eliminate
the threat posed by the KTP to threatened
biodiversity
Question:
what is the biodiversity threatened?
[ listing process outlined under the TSC Act ]
12
bitou bush TAP
species threatened by bitou bush
Sources in
chronological
order
Number of
plant species
at risk in NSW
KTP nomination
National Strategy (WONS)
Draft TAP
Final TAP
KTP = key threatening process
3
6
63
158
TAP = threat abatement plan
13
bitou bush TAP
Weed Impacts to Native Species
(WINS) assessment process:
stage
1 literature + research/unpublished data
2 workshops involving people working
with bitou bush or native species
3 draft list of species circulated and
reviewed
4 model final list of species
14
bitou bush TAP
Approximately 65% are not listed under the
NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act
1995.
However, examination of species at risk
other than plants has not been undertaken
to the same extent (ie. for animals).
15
Applying the TAP process for
lantana nationally
16
a plan for biodiversity conservation
•
•
•
•
•
control is undertaken where the benefits to biodiversity
are the greatest
by knowing the species at risk control techniques and
recovery actions can be tailored
monitor the outcomes of control and adapt management
as needed
limit detrimental effects to
native species following
control
prevent re-infestation or weed
substitution
17
assessing the biodiversity
at risk:
applying the WINS assessment
process to lantana
18
determining biodiversity at risk
Weed Impacts to Native Species (WINS) assessment
process:
stage 1 literature + research/unpublished data
2 workshops involving people working with
lantana or native species (across lantana’s
range)
3 draft list of species circulated and reviewed
4 final list of species or communities ranked
19
biodiversity at risk
Stage 1 of WINS assessment:
species threatened by lantana (2006)
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2005 *
2006 #
Number of
plant species
at risk
20
24
32
45
160
165
Number of
animal species
at risk
2
21
23
* trial of the WINS approach from 2 workshops only (Lismore and Brisbane)
# this assessment was of the NSW Threatened Species Act only (see Coutts-Smith & Downey 2006)
20
determining the impacts across NSW & Qld
Stage 2 of WINS assessment:
Workshops
• discussion on all biodiversity potentially at risk
• reasons why at risk
• develop interim list of species
21
determining the impacts across NSW & Qld
Workshop locations
Distribution of lantana
within NSW and Qld as
well as within Natural
Resource Management
Bodies (or Catchment
Management Authorities)
22
today’s workshop
Stage 2 of WINS assessment:
Aim to compile:
• a list of species affected by lantana
• justification for inclusion of the species at risk
using standard codes or terms
• sources of the information
• vegetation type associated with each species
23
Negative impacts:
justification terms and codes
NP
The native species is not present in infested areas of that species’
typical vegetation community or range. This can be determined
by comparing infested and un-infested sites, as well as anecdotal
or observational data about declines following invasion.
D
There is clear evidence that the weed displaces the native
species. For example, the native occurs at lower than ‘normal’
densities in invaded sites, but is not totally out-competed or
excluded.
OCS
Suppresses the native species by reducing individual’s vigour or
reproductive output.
RP
Recruitment is prevented. ie. adult population is at 'normal' or
'near-normal’ density, but no or few juveniles are present.
CAR The native species is considered at risk, but more information is
needed to determine the level of risk.
24
Positive impacts:
justification terms and codes
AH+ There is clear evidence that the weed provides an additional
habitat for the native species. For example, the native species
occurs at higher than ‘normal’ densities in invaded sites.
P+
The weed promotes the native species by increasing individual’s
vigour or reproductive output through such things as increased
resources, providing food for animals or changes to soil
characteristics.
25
Neutral:
Positive impacts:
justification terms and codes
AH+ There is clear evidence that the weed provides an additional
habitat for the native species. For example, the native species
occurs at higher than ‘normal’ densities in invaded sites.
P+
The weed promotes the native species by increasing individual’s
vigour or reproductive output through such things as increased
resources, providing food for animals or changes to soil
characteristics.
N
Animals have switched to utilising the weed as a result of native
vegetation being replaced by lantana, but there has been no
change in their overall density or condition.
26
what’s next
verifying and finalising the
biodiversity at risk
27
determining the biodiversity at risk
revise interim list (stage 3 of the WINS)
- interim list will be placed on the web site for
comment and revision
- revise and finalise list of species at risk
28
knowing the biodiversity at
risk is only half the
management problem:
selecting sites for control
29
information needed to rank sites
What we need to select sites:
• list of sites
• site attributes
• maps
• process to rank sites for control
30
31
site selection process from Bitou TAP
ranking sites:
1 effectiveness of control at site
(is control possible and effective)
2 actual impact
(degree of impact posed to native species)
3 condition
1 of the species (popn vs whole range)
2 other threats present
32
future
draft plan available by the end of the year
monitoring guidelines to be developed
as part of the project some of the priority sites will
receive initial funding (in 2008/09 - $360K)
33
further information
Refer to our web-site for further information on WINS system
and the development of the lantana plan
Go to:
http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Lantan
a_threat_to_biodiversity
Email: [email protected]
34