Karri forest HCV assessment June 2020 Copyright © 2020, Forest Products Commission. All rights reserved.

All materials; including internet pages, documents and on-line graphics, audio and video are protected by copyright law. Copyright of these materials resides with the State of Western Australia.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under provisions of the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced or re-used for any purposes whatsoever without prior written permission of the General Manager, Forest Products Commission.

Permission to use these materials can be obtained by contacting:

Copyright Officer Forest Products Commission Locked Bag 888 PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE WA 6849 AUSTRALIA

Telephone: +61 8 9363 4600 Internet: www.fpc.wa.gov.au Email: [email protected]

Recommended reference:

Forest Products Commission 2020, ‘Karri forest HCV assessment’, Perth, Australia. Karri forest HCV assessment

Feedback Please refer to the Forest Products Commission’s website for information on how to provide feedback on this document. Feedback and comments on this document can be directed to: Forest Products Commission Phone: +61 8 9363 4600 Fax: +61 8 9363 4601 Email: [email protected]

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 1 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Acknowledgement The Forest Products Commission (FPC) acknowledges the Noongar Nations that are the traditional owners of the Southwest Boojarah and the Wagyl Kaip and Southern Noongar karri forests and lands. We respect the Elders past, present and emerging.

Further detail of the FPC’s commitment to first Australians is available in the FPC’s Reconciliation action plan (2018); and Statements of commitment: engagement with Noongar peoples in the South West of Western Australia (FPC, 2015b).

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 2 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Contents

Executive summary ...... 4

Background ...... 6

Assessment pathway ...... 7

High Conservation Value 1 – Species diversity ...... 12

High Conservation Value 2 – Landscape-level ecosystems and mosaics ...... 29

High Conservation Value 3 – Ecosystems and habitats...... 33

High Conservation Value 4 – Basic ecosystem services in critical situations ...... 41

High Conservation Value 5 – Community needs ...... 46

High Conservation Value 6 – Cultural values ...... 48

References ...... 55

Appendix 1 – Shortened forms ...... 60

Appendix 2 – Legislation relevant to the karri FMU ...... 62

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 3 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Executive summary This Forest Products Commission (FPC) document provides an assessment of High Conservation Values (HCVs) in the karri Forest Management Unit (FMU) using the guidance of FSC Australia’s HCVs evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019). The karri FMU is the area of pure and mixed karri forest blocks available for harvest by the FPC. This HCV assessment and the associated management activities implemented, aim to demonstrate that HCVs are not threatened within the karri FMU. HCV 1: Species diversity

HCV 1 values are present in the karri FMU. The karri FMU is part of a global biodiversity hotspot, as declared by Conservation International and contains threatened flora and fauna. Management activities to identify and protect these values include targeted flora and fauna surveys, the use of the Fauna Distribution Information System (FDIS) and predator control. Silvicultural regimes are implemented to ensure habitat and structural diversity is maintained. HCV 2: Landscape-level ecosystems and mosaics

All of the karri FMU is considered to comprise HCV 2 because the karri FMU is located within a larger contiguous area of jarrah and karri forest much of which is in formal reserves and is of regional significance at the landscape level. HCV 2 in the karri FMU is protected through a number of means including through the allocation of informal reserve systems. The FPC also ensures harvesting is within sustainable levels, limits the size of harvest areas and protects soil and water values. HCV 3: Ecosystems and habitats HCV 3 values present within the karri FMU includes priority ecological communities and old- growth forest (both Type 1 and Type 2 old-growth) Genetically distinct populations that are important for conservation may be present. All Type 1 old-growth forest that has been identified has been placed in the reserve system. Type 2 old-growth forest that has been identified has been placed in temporary protection areas. All proposed harvest coupes containing mature karri forest require pre-harvest inspection to identify the presence of Type 1 and Type 2 old-growth forest. Priority ecological communities are excluded from harvesting. Fauna and flora surveys are carried out prior to harvest. HCV 4: Critical ecosystem services

HCV 4 values have been identified in the karri FMU. The karri FMU provides basic ecosystem services for critical situations, such as clean water and irrigation supply systems. The karri FMU includes a significant proportion of the Lefroy Brook Catchment Area, which provides drinking water to regional areas. In order to conserve HCV 4, measures include risk assessments to monitor soil damage and contamination of water courses, and protection of water values through implementation of informal reserves around all watercourses. HCV 5: Community needs

HCV 5 is not considered present as local communities are not critically dependant on the resources in the karri FMU to meet their basic needs. The karri FMU is a source of water for some regional areas, but this is covered in HCV 4 section.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 4 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

HCV 6: Cultural values

Noongar and non-Aboriginal cultural heritage values are present within the karri FMU. In particular, Noongar peoples have a connection to the land and waters of the South West of Western Australia. Prior to disturbance activities, all Noongar and non-Aboriginal registered sites are checked through relevant databases. The FPC ensures compliance with relevant legislation and consults with a range of stakeholders including representatives for country to ensure protection of HCV 6 values. Other HCV 6 values present in the karri FMU include scientific, aesthetic and social values. These are also identified and protected through the pre-harvest planning process.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 5 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Background This karri forest HCV assessment (HCV assessment) should also be read in conjunction with the FPC’s Karri Forest Management Plan (KFMP) (FPC, 2020). The KFMP provides an overview of management of the karri FMU as required under the Forest Management Plan 2014-2023 (FMP 2014) (Conservation Commission, 2013) and incorporates requirements of forest certification. This HCV assessment has been produced in conjunction with the KFMP to meet the requirements of the Forest Stewardship Council’s® (FSC®) Controlled Wood Standard (FSC-STD-30-010; FSC-C120630) and the associated FSC® Australia’s High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019). The area evaluated for this HCV assessment is as per the scope of the KFMP, which is restricted to pure and mixed karri forest blocks available for timber harvesting by the FPC. This area is known as the karri FMU. HCV is not typically a term historically used in the management of native forests in Western Australia. However, the principles associated with the identification and protection of HCVs closely align with existing policies and practices. This HCV assessment seeks to demonstrate how the FPC ensures that the HCVs that have been identified are not threatened by any management activities. The assessment of HCVs was undertaken using the guidance of FSC® Australia’s HCVs evaluation framework (the framework) (FSC Australia, 2019). The FPC recognises that over time the values could change or expand, as identified by stakeholders and experts. For example, although not explicitly mentioned as a value in the framework, biodiversity hotspots are covered in HCV 1, 2 and 3 sections. FSC® Australia’s Directory of Information Sources, which supports the framework, was initially used to help ensure identification of potential HCVs in the karri FMU. This was consulted, along with additional sources (i.e. Forest Management Plan 2014-2023 (FMP 2014)), to provide an initial dataset providing an overview of all the potential HCVs within the karri FMU. The resultant Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013) listed the HCVs and all the sources consulted to identify these. This was made available to stakeholders in 2013, and in addition the FPC’s assessment of HCV’s has been updated at least annually to incorporate stakeholder feedback and new information such as updates to listings of threatened species. The FPC’s comprehensive assessment of primary data sources was an important first step in ensuring that potential HCVs have been identified within the karri FMU. In addition, this HCV assessment describes how each step of the framework has been followed. It is important to note that HCV identification and protection is integrated into management planning, where for example, checks for heritage values (values within HCV 6) will be undertaken for each coupe area prior to disturbance activities. This HCV assessment outlines how management planning and processes compliment the requirements of the framework. The following details the management processes used to identify and protect HCVs from potential adverse impacts. This management system forms a layered process at five levels, initially focussing on strategic land management decisions and moving to operational decision making. All of these steps involve stakeholder consultation. The five levels are: 1) Assessment of natural, cultural, economic and social values, (otherwise considered HCVs) formed the basis for establishing and reviewing the reserve system to meet the requirements of the National Forest Policy Statement (Commonwealth of Australia, 1995). The values are assessed and management actions are described in the Western Australian Comprehensive Regional Assessment (Commonwealth of

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 6 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Australia, 1998) and the Regional Forest Agreement for the South-West Forest Region of Western Australia (Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Western Australia, 1999). This assessment included stakeholder consultation to identify values at the regional scale. 2) A second tier of land use management planning has further refined and detailed the management measures for these values in the FMP 2014. In the preparation of the FMP 2014, additional information has been considered in evaluating HCVs, including consultation with key stakeholders, public meetings and the release of the draft FMP 2014 for public comment. Separately, the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation has produced plans for the relevant water catchments, which have also been developed with stakeholder input. 3) A number of technical specifications, guidelines and procedures related to the management of HCVs have been made publically available. During the development of the FMP 2014 there was also an opportunity for the public to comment on operational guidelines. 4) Ongoing stakeholder engagement processes encourage the identification of specific values and the appropriate way to manage for those values. Opportunities for stakeholder input arise through: • The release of the indicative three year harvest plans produced by the Parks and Wildlife Service within the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA). • The release of the indicative one year harvest plans produced by the FPC in consultation with the Parks and Wildlife Service. These are made publically available and there is invitation provided through notices in newspapers and on the FPC’s website for members of the public to comment on these one year indicative harvest plans. • Preparation of operational coupe plans prepared by the FPC. In particular, the FPC commits to providing the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC) with the three1 and one year harvest plans at the earliest possible opportunity to ensure that SWALSC are provided with an opportunity to comment and provide feedback. 5) Review of performance occurs through the FPC’s Integrated Forest Management System (IFMS) and is complimented by periodic forest inspections, which are held jointly with stakeholders including at times the Parks and Wildlife Service. This helps facilitate transparency and external feedback, which can in turn improve procedures and management. In addition, the FPC’s performance against various requirements under the FMP 2014 is monitored by the Parks and Wildlife Service.

Assessment pathway

The following sections identify and assess each of the six HCVs that are listed within the framework. Each HCV has been assessed in accordance with the step by step assessment pathway outlined in the HCVs evaluation framework as described below.

1 Whilst the Parks and Wildlife Service are responsible for the three-year plan, the FPC will also ensure that SWALSC is provided with a copy of the plan as soon as it is becomes available.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 7 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Best Available Information

Consult the Best Available Information to identify relevant datasets and prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly (HCVs 1-6)

HCVs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 The FSC Australia’s Directory of Information Sources was consulted to identify relevant datasets and to prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly. Additional datasets used have been outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). Further data has also been consulted since 2013. In particular, the FPC has reviewed information available on the South West Australia global biodiversity hotspot.

HCV 2 Appropriate databases were interrogated to enable mapping and reporting on vegetation communities, condition assessment, wilderness assessment, concentrations of species, old- growth forest, wilderness, growth stage, vegetation condition and remnant vegetation, harvesting history and to determine whether further mapping needed to be commissioned. Additional datasets used are outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013).

HCV 6 Historical and Aboriginal inventories at the national, state and local levels were consulted. This includes historical accounts and local knowledge.

Expert Consultation

Consult experts and other knowledgeable stakeholders to identify HCVs (HCVs1-6).

HCVs 1-6 There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of the FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2020), this HCV assessment, and the associated Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). In addition, stakeholder consultation has been undertaken in relation to the Western Australian Comprehensive Regional Assessment (CRA) (Commonwealth of Australia, 1998) and the Regional Forest Agreement for the South-West Forest Region of Western Australia (Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Western Australia, 1999), as well as that consultation related to both the FMP 2004 and the FMP 2014.

HCV 1 Expert advice has been provided by the DBCA who contribute to the protection of threatened and priority species by:

• Maintaining databases of the locations of threatened species and ecological communities, conducting searches where high impact disturbance such as road making is proposed, and maintaining licensing systems and compliance checking programs where any threatened flora is proposed to be ‘taken2’.

• Developing and reviewing periodically the Forest Fauna Distribution Information System (FDIS) 3 (Christensen et al., 2005). The system combines the vegetation

2 ‘To take’ in the context of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

3 This document is currently under revision but has not yet been approved for release by the Parks and Wildlife Service’s Director of the Conservation and Ecosystem Management Division.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 8 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

complexes mapped for the Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) for the South West forest region of Western Australia into fauna habitats and correlates those habitats with the likely presence of particular vertebrate fauna species. It can then be used to predict the likely occurrence of sensitive species, relative to planned management arrangements.

• Undertaking biological surveys:

o of priority areas determined in consultation with the Conservation and Parks Commission;

o used, where appropriate, to assist in evaluating the extent to which biodiversity is being conserved and the need for any review of the reserve system; and

o recorded in relevant databases that are accessible as appropriate to other users.

DBCA is regularly consulted through the Disturbance Approvals System (DAS) process for each coupe.

FPC employs a consultant ecologist to perform targeted fauna surveys and provide the associated management recommendations. Qualified experts from DBCA, or contracted by FPC, perform the required rare flora searches.

Threatened wildlife listings are reviewed annually and changes can be recommended by the Western Australian Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) and the Threatened Ecological Communities Scientific Committee (TECSC). The public is invited to submit nominations to add to (or delete from) the lists of threatened species (plants and animals) and threatened ecological communities as described on the Parks and Wildlife Service’s website.

HCV 2 Over the past 20 years there has been a co-ordinated effort to identify the values related to landscape level forests as a basis for establishing and reviewing the reserve system to meet the requirements of the National Forest Policy Statement 1992 (Commonwealth of Australia, 1995). These assessments, culminating in the Western Australian Comprehensive Regional Assessment (Commonwealth of Australia, 1998) and the Regional Forest Agreement for the South-West Forest Region of Western Australia (Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Western Australia, 1999), included processes for stakeholder consultation to identify values at the regional scale.

HCV3 Additional information on stakeholder consultation in relation to old growth forests is provided in the HCV3 section.

Gap analysis

A gap analysis shall be undertaken of the adequacy of existing data with a focus on Endangered and Critically Endangered species including in circumstances where species are poorly recorded or mapped; and/or habitat requirements are not easily defined or poorly understood. Further investigation and/or research and consultation to address identified significant data gaps shall be undertaken where gaps are identified. This includes targeted surveys/habitat evaluations where required. (HCV1 only)

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 9 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

FPC developed a Data Audit and Gap Analysis against the FSC® HCV framework in 2013. This determined that the available data has been adequate to assess HCV presence across the FMU.

FPC recognises that information on HCV presence is not always known at the local level. The FDIS is an important tool for fauna that are poorly recorded or mapped (see page 22) as it provides a prediction of species based on vegetation type. FPC conducts targeted fauna surveys which include the use of camera traps in karri coupes prior to operations. Rare flora surveys are conducted in areas proposed for permanent disturbance (for example, roading).

Threat Assessment

Undertake a threat assessment of proposed management activities on identified HCVs (HCVs 1,3,4,5,6)

HCVs 1,3.4.6 Potential threats and impacts from FPC’s management activities are identified in FPC’s Aspects and Impacts Register. They are rated for their likelihood of occurrence and severity of consequences both before and after FPC’s controls and mitigation are in place.

The potential threats to HCVs by planned disturbance operations are identified and assessed during the planning process. Prior to any disturbance operation the FPC completes the online Disturbance Approval System (DAS) form, which is submitted to the Parks and Wildlife Service for approval. This identifies whether any HCVs will be impacted and management actions are implemented to minimise the impact.

HCV3 The occurrence of old-growth karri forest was mapped during the preparation of the Regional Forest Agreement and since the year 2000 all areas have been protected from harvesting and associated disturbance. This continues under the Forest Management Plan 2014-2023 (FMP). Pre-disturbance checks for any unmapped old-growth forest are conducted prior to approval being issued for any harvest operations.

Identify Control Measures

Identify control measures required to maintain identified HCVs (HCVs 1-6)

The control measures are described in the address of each HCV.

Consult stakeholders on assessment and control measures

Consult stakeholders on assessment and control measures (HCVs 1-6)

There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of the FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2020), this HCV assessment, and the associated Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013).

Documents including Procedure 47 – Identification, assessment and demarcation of Type 2 old growth karri forest, Procedure 46 – Targeted fauna surveys within pure and mixed karri forest, the Karri fauna monitoring training manual, and reports on karri fauna monitoring objectives are made available on FPCs website.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 10 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Implement Control Measures

Implement control measures (HCVs 1-6)

The FPC maintains an integrated forest management system (IFMS). The FPC uses formal governance software (Governance Manager) to internally manage its compliance with certification requirements and to help facilitate continuous improvement. The FPC implements control measures as specified in the FMP and on the DAS form approved by the Parks and Wildlife Service. The Parks and Wildlife Service monitors the FPC’s compliance. In addition, the FPC regularly monitors contractor compliance.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 11 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

High Conservation Value 1 – Species diversity Concentrations of biological diversity including endemic species, and rare, threatened or endangered species, that are significant at global, regional or national levels.

Designation Description Present in FMU

HCV 1.1 Areas that contain significant concentrations of rare and Yes threatened species or that contain habitat critical to the survival and long-term viability of these species.

HCV 1.2 Areas that contain centres of endemism. Yes

HCV 1.3 Areas that contain significant concentrations of rare species that Yes are poorly reserved at the IBRA region scale

HCV 1.4 Areas with mapped significant seasonal concentrations* of Likely species

HCV 1.5 Areas of high species/community diversity Yes

HCV 1.6 Refugia Yes

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 12 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019). HCV 1 – Definitions

Habitat includes features such as hollow bearing trees, and other features that are critical to survival and long term viability to a significant concentration of that species.

‘Refugia’: an area identified in formally recognised reports or peer-reviewed journals as performing a significant function in maintaining species during, for example, periods of climate variability and extremes; human induced causes such as disease; or population fluctuations from natural or human-induced causes.

‘Significant concentrations’: Concentrations of species that are considered significant at a global, regional or national scale.

‘Areas that contain significant concentrations of rare and threatened species’: may include specific areas where there are a significant number of multiple species, or where there is a proportionately large population of an individual species. Concentrations of species are often linked to one stage of a species’ life history and associated with activities such as breeding, staging, feeding or over-wintering. ‘Areas with Significant seasonal concentrations of species’: areas important to the lifecycle or migration paths of migratory and communal breeding species.

Best Available Information for HCV 1

Includes as applicable: • Recovery plans and related documents • Habitat mapping • Databases • Peer reviewed journal articles • Reports by government bodies and credible institutions, organisations and experts • Appendix A of the Australian National Risk Assessment • Expert research and advice (including for high SIR operations, provided by a locally knowledgeable expert independent of the organization), including Population Viability Analysis and other relevant techniques • Expert and knowledgeable stakeholder data • Field surveys.

Outcomes

The South West of Western Australia is recognised as one of 35 global biodiversity hotspots by Conservation International. The area contains approximately 7 400 species of vascular plants, half of which are endemic to the region. Within this biodiverse area, the high rainfall forest areas of which the karri FMU is a part, are relatively species poor (Hopper and Gioia, 2004, Myers et al., 2000). It is the communities with which the karri forest is associated (heaths, woodlands, granite outcrops and swamps) that are species rich, especially in the southeast of the distribution (Christensen, 1992, Hopper et al., 1992).

In 2003 the Australian Government identified 15 national biodiversity hotspots. The national biodiversity hotspot areas in Western Australia fall outside of the karri FMU.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 13 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

While present within the karri FMU, the most significant elements of this HCV class in the Warren Bioregion are generally located outside the area of the FPC’s activities (such as the highest levels of endemism and biodiversity, and most critically endangered species and communities).

HCV 1.1 Areas that contain significant concentrations of rare and threatened species or that contain habitat critical to the survival and long term viability of these species

Threatened species are those assessed as being under risk of extinction. In Western Australia, the Biodiversity Conservation Act provides for the conservation and protection of native plants (flora) and animals (fauna). The Act allows the Minister for Environment to declare a higher level of protection to flora and fauna that are likely to become extinct, are rare, or otherwise in need of special protection.

Threatened flora and fauna are further ranked according to their level of threat using the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List categories and criteria. The rankings include (Parks and Wildlife, 2019):

• CR: Critically Endangered – considered to be facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future.

• EN: Endangered – considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future.

• VU: Vulnerable – considered to be facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future.

• MI: Migratory birds protected under an international agreement – birds that are subject to an agreement between the government of Australia and the governments of Japan (JAMBA), China (CAMBA) and The Republic of Korea (ROKAMBA), and the Bonn Convention, relating to the protection of migratory birds.

• CD: Species of special conservation interest (conservation dependent fauna) - fauna of special conservation need being species dependent on ongoing conservation intervention to prevent it becoming eligible for listing as threatened.

• OS: Other specially protected species - fauna otherwise in need of special protection to ensure their conservation.

In addition to threatened species, ‘priority’ taxa have also been listed. Priority species are ranked in order of priority for evaluation of conservation status with Priority 1 (P1) being the highest priority, down to Priority 4 (P4), which is the lowest priority. Priority 1, 2 and 3 (poorly-known species) are ‘…possibly threatened species that do not meet survey criteria, or are otherwise data deficient…’ (Parks and Wildlife, 2019). Priority 4 species are rare, near threatened and other species in need of monitoring.

Priority categories are defined in the document titled Conservation Codes for Western Australian Flora and Fauna (DBCA, 2019).This table includes a probability of occurrence ranking, with 1 being the highest and 4 being the lowest likelihood of being present in the karri FMU.

The rankings are defined as follows:

1) The species has been recorded in the area, there is a confirmed sighting or secondary signs of the species within the area, and extensive or sufficient suitable Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 14 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

habitat. A ranking of 1 will also indicate a “significant concentration” of the species is likely within the KFMU, as per the HCV 1.1 descriptor.

2) Likely to occur in the area, extensive or sufficient suitable habitat within the area, or the area contains habitat that is likely to be critical to the long term viability of the species, and the species has been recorded within surrounding areas.

3) May occur in the area, limited or no confirmed suitable habitat within the area, but the species has been recorded within the surrounding areas.

4) Not likely to occur in the area, no confirmed suitable habitat within the area, but the species has been recorded within the surrounding areas.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 15 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Table 1: List of threatened and priority fauna present in the karri FMU*

* This list was last updated in February 2020 following the release of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice in September 2018. Note the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 has been transitioned under regulations 170, 171 and 172 of the Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2018 to be the lists of Threatened, Extinct and Specially Protected species under Part 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

Probability Recovery Conservation of Scientific Name Common Name Ranking Plan*/Conservation occurrence Advice**

Amphibians

Spicospina flammocaerulea Sunset Frog VU 4 Conservation Advice

Birds

Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper MI 4 ---

Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone MI 4 ---

Atrichornis clamosus Noisy Scrub Bird EN 3 Available

Botaurus poiciloptilus Australasian Bittern EN 4 Available

Cacatua pastinator Muir’s Corella CD 3 pastinator Management Plan

Sharp-tailed Calidris acuminata MI 4 --- Sandpiper

Calidris alba Sanderling MI 4 ---

Calidris ferruginea Curlew sandpiper CR 4 Conservation Advice

Calidris melanotos Pectoral sandpiper MI 4 ---

Calidris ruficollis Red-necked stint MI 4 __

Calidris subminuta Long-toed Stint MI 4 __

Calyptorhynchus banksii Forest Red-tailed VU 1 Available naso Black Cockatoo

Calyptorhynchus baudinii Baudin’s Cockatoo EN 1 Available

Calyptorhynchus latirostris Carnaby’s Cockatoo EN 1 Available

Charadrius leschenaultii Greater Sand Plover VU 4 Conservation Advice

Charadrius rubricollis Hooded Plover P4 4 ---

Other specially Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon 2 --- protected fauna

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 16 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Probability Recovery Conservation of Scientific Name Common Name Ranking Plan*/Conservation occurrence Advice**

Hydroprogne caspia Caspian Tern MI 4 ---

Australian Little Ixobrychus dubius P4 4 --- Bittern

Ixobrychus flavicollis Black Bittern (South P2 4 --- australis West subpopulation)

Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl VU 1 Available

Ninox connivens connivens Barking Owl P3 2 ---

Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck P4 3 ---

Pandion cristatus Osprey MI 4 ---

Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis MI 4 ---

Pacific Golden Pluvialis fulva MI 4 --- Plover

Tyto novaehollandiae Masked owl P3 1 --- novaehollandiae

Fish

Mud Minnow/ Galaxiella munda VU 1 --- Western Dwarf Galaxias Black-striped

Galaxiella nigrostriata Minnow/ Black- EN 1 Conservation advice striped Dwarf Galaxias Geotria australis Pouched Lamprey P3 1 ---

Lepidogalaxias Salamander Fish EN 1 --- salamandroides

Balston’s Pygmy Nannatherina balstoni VU 1 Conservation Advice Perch

Nannoperca pygmaea Little Pygmy Perch EN 1 Conservation Advice

Invertebrates

Western Pygmy Bertmainius opimus P3 2 --- Trapdoor Spider

Copepod Calamoecia elongata P3 1 --- (Northcliffe)

Daphnia occidentalis Water Flea (Karri P3 1 --- forests) Fibulacamptus bisetosus Non-marine P2 1 --- Harpacticoid

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 17 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Probability Recovery Conservation of Scientific Name Common Name Ranking Plan*/Conservation occurrence Advice**

copepod (Muirillup Rock)

Pseudohydryphantes doegi P2 4 --- Doeg's watermite

Carter’s Freshwater Westralunio carteri VU 1 Conservation advice Mussel

Mammals

Bettongia penicillata Woylie, Brush-tailed CR 1 Available ogilbyi Bettong

Chuditch, Western Dasyurus geoffroii VU 1 Available Quoll

Western False Falsistrellus mackenziei P4 1 --- Pipistrelle

Hydromys chrysogaster Water Rat P4 1 ---

Isoodon fusciventer Quenda P4 1 ---

Macrotis lagotis Bilby VU 4 Available

Myrmecobius fasciatus Numbat EN 1 Available

Notamacropus eugenii Tammar Wallaby P4 1 --- derbianus

Western Brush Notamacropus irma P4 1 --- Wallaby

Phascogale tapoatafa South-western Brush- Conservation 1 --- wambenger tailed Phascogale Dependent

Pseudocheirus Western Ringtail CR 1 Available occidentalis Possum

Setonix brachyurus Quokka VU 1 Available

Reptiles

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 18 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Elapognathus minor Short-nosed Snake P2 1 ---

*Recovery plans are developed in accordance with Policy 35 Conserving Threatened Species and Communities (Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, 2015). Where the Forest Vertebrate Fauna Distribution Information System (FDIS) (Christensen et al., 2005) report has shown the potential presence of a rare, threatened or endangered species, management strategies are implemented in accordance with Parks and Wildlife Service’s approval to ensure the protection of those species identified.

** In addition to Recovery Plans, conservation advice under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 are available for many of the nationally listed species. Conservation advice include information on threats and management. In addition to these documents, FPC liaises with DBCA and its contract ecologist to stay informed of any developments in the management of these species.

(i) Threatened flora

A current list of threatened flora can be found on Parks and Wildlife Service’s website. Of these species, Table 2 lists those that have been identified to be present in the karri FMU. Fungi and cryptograms are included in this list. Links to the available Recovery Plans and Conservation Advice are also provided in Table 2.

Table 2: List of threatened flora present in the karri FMU*

* This list was last reviewed in February 2020 following the release of the threatened flora notice in September 2018. The Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 and the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 have been transitioned under regulations 170, 171 and 172 of the Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2018 to be the lists of Threatened, Extinct and Specially Protected species under Part 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

Recovery Conservation Scientific name Common name Plan/Conservation Ranking Advice**

Actinotus repens P3 ---

Amanita fibrillopes P3 ---

Amanita kalamundae P3 ---

Andersonia sp. Echidna P2 ---

Astartea granitica P3 ---

Caladenia christineae Christine’s Spider Orchid VU Conservation Advice

Caladenia harringtoniae Harrington’s Spider Orchid VU Conservation Advice

Caladenia winfieldii Majestic Spider Orchid EN Available

Carex tereticaulis P3 --

Interim Recovery Plan Commersonia apella Many-flowered Commersonia CR Conservation Advice

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 19 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Recovery Conservation Scientific name Common name Plan/Conservation Ranking Advice**

Corybas abditus Swamp Helmet Orchid P3 --

Deyeuxia inaequalis P1 --

Gonocarpus pusillus P4 --

Gonocarpus simplex P4 --

Hemigenia microphylla P3 --

Kennedia glabrata Northcliffe Kennedia VU Conservation Advice

Lambertia rariflora subsp. P3 -- lutea

Leptinella drummondii P3 ---

Lepyrodia heleocharoides P3 ---

Lomandra ordii P4 ---

Myriophyllum trifidum P4 ---

Placynthium nigrum P3 ---

Poa billardierei P3 ---

Pultenaea pinifolia P3 ---

Reedia spathacea Reedia EN Conservation Advice

Rorippa cygnorum P2 ---

Senecio leucoglossus P4 ---

Synaphea hians P3 ---

Tetraria sp. Blackwood P3 --- River

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 20 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Recovery Conservation Scientific name Common name Plan/Conservation Ranking Advice**

Tetratheca exasperata P3 ---

Thysanotus formosus P1 ---

Usnea pulvinata P1 ---

Xanthoparmelia louisii P2 ---

**Recovery Plans and Conservation Advice are developed in accordance with Policy 35 Conserving Threatened Species and Communities (Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, 2015). In addition to these documents, FPC liaises with DBCA to stay informed of any developments in the management of these species.

The endangered Majestic spider orchid Caladenia winfieldii is known from a single population occurring within the karri FMU. It is not associated with the karri forest itself and grows along seasonal creeks in low woodland comprising of Eucalyptus rudis, Melaleuca preissiana and Banksia littoralis. The main threats to this species are feral pigs, inappropriate fire, kangaroo grazing, hydrological change and dieback (DEC, 2009c).

The Many flowered commersonia Commersonia apella was rediscovered in the Warren region in 2019, after last being recorded in the area in 1920. This species is listed as Critically Endangered due to previously being known from only one other small extant population near Esperance. The new population has been found along creeklines in the karri forest within the informal reserve system.

HCV 1.2 Areas that contain centres of endemism

South Western WA contains centres of both endemism and biodiversity. Crisp et al. (2001) in fact demonstrated that South West WA scores more strongly as a centre of endemism than a centre of species richness. Slatyer et al. (2007) identified 11 main centres of anuran (frog) endemism on the Australian continent with‘…the most important being the Wet Tropics and the south-west near Bunbury-Augusta and near Walpole’ (p. 583). Studies of aquatic and invertebrate fauna show similar patterns (Hearn et al, 2002). Hopper et al 1992 found the Warren bioregion to be the most important centre of endemism for conservative relictual high rainfall (vascular plant) taxa in WA.

Within the Warren bioregion, the most significant centres of floral endemism are the Scott River Plains, the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge, and the area around Walpole (Lyons et al 2000, McKenzie et al, 2002), areas outside the karri FMU. There are very few endemic flora confined to the karri forest itself (Hopper, et al 1992), a habitat which is relatively species poor in comparison to its surroundings (see HCV 1.5). No species of vertebrate fauna have been identified as endemic to the karri FMU, though some invertebrate fauna may be endemic to this area (Bain, 2020).

Undocumented centres of endemism within the karri FMU are generally associated with diverse ecotypes such as granite outcrops, wetlands and banksia woodlands. These ecotypes are generally outside of the FPC’s harvesting operations or are identified during fauna surveys for exclusion from operations.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 21 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

While the highest levels of endemism are outside the forest management area, they are significant on a national level and are assessed as being a HCV that requires consideration in managing timber harvesting operations within the karri FMU.

HCV 1.3 Areas that contain significant concentrations of rare species that are poorly reserved at the IBRA region scale

Rare species are considered in forest management planning regardless of their status in the IBRA region. The DBCA Priority rankings (see Conservation Codes for Western Australian Flora and Fauna (DBCA, 2019) address this. These species are included in the address of HCV 1.1.

HCV 1.4 Areas with mapped seasonal concentrations of species

Birdlife Australia has identified Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) in Western Australia for bird conservation including areas of value for Migratory species. None of these are present in the karri FMU.

The pouched lamprey (Geotria australis, Priority 3) migrates upstream from the ocean to spawn in the permanent fresh headwater creeks throughout the Warren bioregion. The larval lampreys spend several years filter feeding in these pools and creeks before maturing and migrating to the ocean (Morgan, et al 1998).

Within the FMU, fauna surveys currently assess indicators of activity for threatened species and are likely to detect seasonal activity for species for which indicators are persistent in the environment, for example, cockatoo feeding debris or chewing around hollows associated with breeding activity. Where such indicators are detected, provisions are made that ensure protection of habitat that is important for these seasonal uses.

This HCV is assessed as likely to be present in the karri FMU.

HCV 1.5 Areas of high species/community diversity

The South West Australian biodiversity hotspot as declared by Conservation International is represented in Figure 1, which shows the hotspot location in relation to the karri FMU. The area covers a vast expanse of over 350 000 square kilometres (Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, n.d.) and includes urban population centres such as the Perth metropolitan area. The main threats to the biodiversity values within the hotspot are land clearing, salinity, feral animals and Phytophthora cinnamomi (Commonwealth of Australia, n.d.).

In a contrast to this highly biodiverse region, species richness in the karri forest is substantially lower than in the surrounding ecosystems of heathlands, woodlands, granite outcrops and swamps (Christensen, 1992, Hopper et al., 1992). These areas are either outside the FMU or in informal reserves. Species diversity in karri is also lower than jarrah or wandoo forests (Bradshaw, 2015).

Pockets of higher species/community diversity exist within the karri FMU, but they will generally be associated with habitats such as riparian systems, granite outcrops, banksia and taxandria woodlands. These will often be within the informal reserves and protected from harvesting. Any occurrence within proposed harvesting cells are likely to be detected during fauna surveys and strategies applied for their protection.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 22 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

This HCV is assessed as present in the karri FMU.

HCV 1.6 Refugia

The term refugia refers to a habitat that species can retreat to, persist in, and expand from under climate change. In the Australian context, areas with refuge potential may be cooler, wetter and have greater topographic relief (for example, mountains, valleys and outcrops) (CSIRO, 2014).

The Warren bioregion experiences the highest rainfall in South West Western Australia and is thus a refuge for relict species from wetter and milder climatic conditions (Hearn et al, 2002). All reasonably undisturbed, permanently moist freshwater habitats are potential refuges for Gondwanan relictual aquatic species and/or threatened taxa or communities (Wardell-Johnson and Horwitz, 2000). Swamps and outcrop sites are likely to have been important refugia through the climate fluctuations of the past (Wardell-Johnson and Horwitz, 1996).

In the forests between Walpole and Denmark, the karri occurs in mix or is replaced by the three tingle tree species (Eucalyptus guilfoylei, E. jacksonii and E. brevistylis). These species are unique in Western Australia and are considered relicts from a wetter Gondwanan past. Other relictual biota such as the tingle trapdoor spider are found in this habitat. The tingle forests are considered refugia (Wardell-Johnson and Coates, 1996). Tingle forests exist only outside the karri FMU and mainly in protected conservation reserves.

Within the karri FMU, riparian zones and aquatic ecosystems offer varying degrees of refuge during dry periods.

This HCV is assessed as present in the karri FMU.

HCV 1 Control Measures

The ‘Biological diversity’ section of the KFMP (FPC, 2020) outlines the reserve system throughout the FMP 2014 which has been designed and implemented to manage risks to HCV 1.

The Parks and Wildlife Service (and in some cases an FPC contractor) conducts targeted flora surveys prior to carrying out any activity likely to result in permanent or semi-permanent disturbance (e.g. road construction or construction of log landings). These flora surveys are conducted by qualified experts.

In addition, extensive fauna research has informed the approach taken in protecting threatened and priority fauna. FDIS is checked through the DAS process, and where there is potential for the presence of rare, threatened or endangered species, management strategies are implemented in accordance with the Parks and Wildlife Service’s instructions. The following excerpt of the FDIS manual (Christensen et al., 2005) provides an overview of the system.

Excerpt of the FDIS manual (Christensen et al., 2005) 4:

4 This extract has been taken from the Executive summary (p. 6-7) and Timber harvesting (p. 21-22).

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 23 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

FDIS is a computerized system for predicting the occurrence of vertebrate fauna species in any given area of forest prior to timber harvesting or prescribed burning operations.

The system allows ‘sensitive’ species to be taken account of prior to planned disturbance events thereby obviating the need for expensive biological surveys. As a predictive system FDIS has a number of advantages over the biological survey method that is generally used to discover what species are present within an area.

Commenced in 1996, FDIS developed from a system of field inspections of forest blocks containing proposed harvesting coupes by the two senior authors. The likelihood of the presence of fauna species in the block was assessed in the field by using a list of 279 vertebrate forest species and listing them against major vegetation associations found by field inspection to be present within the block. Species were listed and scored on a scale of 0-3, scores being allocated using the combined accumulated knowledge and experience of the two senior authors (total of more than 60 years) together with information contained in standard texts on fauna.

The system was later refined, the Havel/Mattiske RFA Vegetation Complexes map, replacing the field trips as a basis for the fauna predictions. Over a period of 2 years various combinations of the more than 300 Vegetation Complexes were assessed against fauna distributions. Using trial and error it was found that a combination of the major forest formations together with moisture and temperature gradients, both dictated largely by latitude and distance from the sea, gave the most reliable Vegetation Complexes combinations for predicting fauna. As a result 54 ‘Fauna Habitats’ were developed for use in predicting fauna distribution within the forested area.

A Fauna Habitats/Vertebrate species table, (54 habitats/306 species), comprising a total of 16,524 possible combinations, forms the basis of the predictions which can now be made readily on the computer for any given area within the forest. The use of the Havel/Mattiske maps eliminates the need for field visits to each coupe and every proposed prescribed burn area each year.

The system has been validated using the more recent and most accurate WA Museum and CALM [now Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions] fauna records. Further validation is needed which may be simply done by carrying out biological surveys, one or two a year over the next few years in selected areas of the forest where information is most limited.

Species schedules, that give details of relevant biology as well as recommendations for management, have been developed for each ‘sensitive’ species. The system also contains tables with extra information on fauna succession following timber harvesting and regeneration and prescribed fire.

The object of the assessment procedure is to identify what vertebrate fauna are likely to occur within felling coupes prior to any timber harvesting and regeneration operations taking place. This allows measures to be taken to further protect any species that might need to be given special attention, over and above the routine precautions built into the current silvicultural prescriptions.

The FDIS procedure is an indirect method based on predictions of fauna occurrences in mapped vegetation complexes. Christensen and Liddelow [1997] consider that this indirect method of assessment is superior to carrying out actual biological surveys in each coupe, for the following reasons:

• standard biological survey, unless repeated over several years, can only provide a ‘point in time’ snapshot of the fauna that inhabits any habitat;

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 24 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

• the ‘rare’ and restricted species, the species of most interest to managers, are often not recorded during biological surveys because these species are usually uncommon and few in number;

• the activity of many species, in particular reptiles and birds, is strongly regulated by seasonal factors, which means that a ‘once off’ biological survey is unlikely to locate all the species that occur in an area; and

• surveys on small areas, such as a felling coupe, will inevitably underestimate the species that may be present in the general area and which utilize the coupe but are not necessarily present on the coupe all of the time.

It is suggested that biological surveys in these situations can in fact be counter-productive, managers may be ‘lulled into a false sense of security’ by the fact that an area has been actually ‘checked on the ground.’ In reality it is almost certain the list of fauna produced as a result of a biological survey of a coupe or an area in preparation for prescribed burning, will be incomplete. Worst of all, the species that are missed during biological surveys are likely to be the less obvious and less common species, the very species managers need to know about.

The indirect predictive technique on the other hand allows attention to be focussed on the species sensitive to timber harvest and regeneration and prescribed fire in the most practical and cost effective manner.

Thus in cases where predictions indicate probable presence, follow-up field assessment and confirmation of a species presence can be undertaken using targeted survey techniques if this is deemed to be necessary. In practice we have found that this usually only applies to a limited number of coupes.

Biological surveys are nevertheless a very useful mechanism for improving our knowledge of species distribution and every opportunity should be taken to carry out biological surveys in areas of forest not previously surveyed or where FDIS information needs to be improved.

In addition to the use of FDIS, the FPC conducts targeted fauna surveys prior to harvest activities to identify threatened and priority species (FPC, 2019b). It is intended that these surveys will help to further validate the FDIS system, help provide additional survey data showing confirmed sightings of species, and potentially identify specific habitat elements being utilised by threatened and priority species. It also helps to identify the presence of predator species. These surveys will provide further guidance to ensure appropriate management strategies are implemented. Further information about these surveys, including the procedure, staff training and the program’s performance monitoring, is available on the FPC’s website.

Other measures to protect HCV1 include:

• The FPC must receive a letter of approval to commence operations from the Parks and Wildlife Service prior to operations commencing. Where FDIS and/or fauna monitoring results have shown the potential or confirmed presence of a rare, threatened or endangered species, management strategies are implemented in accordance with Parks and Wildlife Service’s instructions to ensure the protection of those species identified (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Implementation of operations undertaken by the FPC need to be consistent with the DBCA’s Policy 35 Conserving Threatened Species and Communities Policy (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 25 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

• At the beginning of each financial year, the FPC establishes a budget for feral predator control (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management). The Parks and Wildlife Service undertake predator control on behalf of the FPC and maintain a spreadsheet of harvested coupes with ongoing predator control requirements. Coupes may be baited before harvesting, during harvesting or up to three years after harvesting has been completed. As new coupes are planned and the online Disturbance Approval System form is completed, predator control requirements will be updated as necessary (Responsibility: Parks and Wildlife Service Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) Co-ordinator in the relevant region).

• Implementation of predator control pre and post harvesting (Responsibility: Parks and Wildlife Service’s SFM Co-ordinator in the relevant region).

• Silviculture guidelines include measures designed to minimise the potential impacts of timber harvesting on a range of values, which focus on maintaining stand complexity and structural diversity, and defining the type and extent of habitat elements and future crop trees that must be retained. Habitat requirements (e.g. for nesting, roosting and foraging) for fauna are considered in determining the criteria for selection and retention of habitat trees and coarse woody debris (e.g. hollow logs) on the ground. For further information about silvicultural guidelines refer to the Reference Material for Karri Forest Silviculture (Bradshaw, 2015). The requirements under the FMP 2014 incorporates the outcomes of the Review of Silviculture in Forests of South-West Western Australia (Burrows et al., 2011), which includes further measures to protect marri trees as habitat for black cockatoos. The FPC also adheres to the Silviculture guideline for karri forest (Parks and Wildlife, 2014a), other silvicultural advice from the Parks and Wildlife Service as it is provided, and complementary procedures developed by the FPC (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management, and FPC and Parks and Wildlife Service treemarkers).

• The FPC considers the Silviculture Guideline for Karri Forest (Parks and Wildlife, 2014a) to be best practice and to provide an optimal balance between habitat retention and future productive capacity. Habitat retention requirements are outlined in the Parks and Wildlife Service’s Procedure FEM035 Karri – Treemarking for retention (Parks and Wildlife, 2014b) and Field Guide FEM039 Karri treemarking ready reckoner (Parks and Wildlife, 2014) and include the following:

o In all pure karri stands, two primary and two secondary habitat trees per hectare will be retained, where they are present and it is safe to do so.

o In mature mixed karri stands, five primary and six to eight secondary habitat trees per hectare are to be retained.

o Additional secondary habitat trees are to be retained for every primary tree that is not available.

o Retain dead trees if they provide for large structural elements, are sound and it is safe to do so.

o Retain some second-storey elements (i.e. Allocasuarina decussata, Banksia grandis, Agonis flexuosa), particularly if in association with retained habitat trees.

• The FPC will also implement additional measures to satisfy requirements of the FSC® Controlled Wood standard and the associated FSC® Australia’s HCVs

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 26 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

evaluation framework. In addition to the above requirements, the FPC implements the following additional retention requirements (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management):

o The position of senescent trees are identified using aerial photography and satellite imagery, and are targeted for inspection during pre-harvest fauna surveys. Any tree showing clear evidence of hollow use by fauna will be retained.

o Where possible, habitat trees are to be retained together as clumps. o The location of all habitat trees will be captured by GPS to ensure their long- term retention.

• The Conservation and Parks Commission introduced Fauna Habitat Zones (FHZs) as a precautionary measure to act as refugia and provide structural diversity. The FPC does not harvest in FHZs, and the selection of the FHZs are as per the Guideline for the Selection of Fauna Habitat Zones (Parks and Wildlife, 2017b) (Responsibility: Parks and Wildlife Service Forest Management Branch).

• FPC keeps informed of developments in management actions for threatened species through continued liaison with its consultant ecologist, the DBCA and attendance at relevant Recovery Team meetings.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 27 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Figure 1: South West Australia global biodiversity hotspot and the karri Forest Management Unit

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 28 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

High Conservation Value 2 – Landscape-level ecosystems and mosaics Intact Forest Landscapes and large landscape-level ecosystems and ecosystem mosaics that are significant at global, regional or national levels, and that contain viable populations of the great majority of the naturally occurring species in natural patterns of distribution and abundance.

Designation Descriptor Present

HCV 2.1 Landscape-level* native forests* with successional stages, forest Yes structures, and species composition that are similar in distribution and abundance to native forests* that have experienced minimal human disturbance, excluding traditional Indigenous* management regimes

HCV 2.2 Forests recognised as being regionally significant at the bioregion No or larger scale in formally recognised reports or peer-reviewed journals, due to the unusual landscape*scale* biodiversity values provided by size and condition of the forest relative to regional forest land cover and land use trends.

HCV 2.3 Forests that provide regionally significant habitat* connectivity* Yes between larger forest areas and/or refugia*

HCV 2.4 Intact Forest Landscapes*, wilderness areas, forests that are No roadless, and/or have not been affected by forest management activity

From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019). HCV 2 Definitions “Intact Forest Landscape’ A territory within today's global extent of forest cover which contains forest and non-forest ecosystems minimally influenced by human economic activity, with an area of at least 500 km2 (50,000 ha) and a minimal width of 10 km (measured as the diameter of a circle that is entirely inscribed within the boundaries of the territory) (Source: Intact Forests / Global Forest Watch. 2006-2014). “Intact Forest Landscape Core Areas’ The portion of an Intact Forest landscape* that contains the most important ecological and cultural values. ‘Large landscape-level native forests’: Relatively contiguous areas of forest (which may be crossed by land management roads or public roads). At the minimum these forests are likely to be thousands or tens of thousands of hectares in size. However, “large” is relative to regional landscape context (particularly the size of forested blocks in the bioregion) and might be smaller or larger than this figure as indicated by consultation with regional experts. In regions where native forests are heavily fragmented by forest type conversion or land use conversion, the increased value of smaller occurrences of remaining natural forest should also be included in the assessment. The forest may be in single or multiple ownerships. HCV 2 includes areas that are in (or close to) what might be called their ‘natural’ condition. Such areas have a relatively full complement of the species that are appropriate to the habitat. HCV 2

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 29 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

designation may arise because the intact forest area is unusually large and therefore of high value due to its contribution to wilderness or landscape values. The general approach in assessing for HCV 2 is to compare forest characteristics (such as extent and intensity of harvest practices, forest communities, successional stages, structures, and species composition and abundance) with native forests that have only been subject to natural disturbance processes or minimal human intervention. Aerial photography or satellite images of the surrounding landscape should also be considered. ‘Regionally Significant’: The forest is significant in the region due to its size, condition, and/or importance to biodiversity conservation. Factors to consider include: • Rarity of forests of this size and quality within the region; • Less affected by anthropogenic factors than similar areas in the region. Best Available Information for HCV 2 Includes where applicable: • Mapping and other data on forest cover, age, succession, structure, species composition, habitat connectivity, anthropogenic disturbance, roadless areas, wilderness, intact forests, and other relevant information on forest condition; and • Peer reviewed journals, government or expert reports and data identifying significant landscape-level forests, for example World Heritage Reports, values threat analysis; scientific reports of landscape scale impacts, comparative study of historical and current aerial photographs. • For Intact Forest Landscapes, mapping and data from Global Forest Watch and World Resource Institute.

Outcomes

HCV 2.1 Landscape-level* native forests* with successional stages, forest structures, and species composition that are similar in distribution and abundance to native forests* that have experienced minimal human disturbance, excluding traditional Indigenous* management regimes.

The FPC considers that the entire karri FMU is of significant landscape level value. The FMU contains native forests with successional stages and species composition similar to undisturbed forest. In addition, the karri FMU is part of a global biodiversity hotspot, as listed by Conservation International.

The karri forest in the FMU contains informal reserves as one of a multitude of strategies employed to protect HCVs. Outside the reserve system, much of the forest in the karri FMU is regrowth and two-tiered forest and has been subject to active forest management for a considerable period of time.

However, given that karri is endemic to the South West of Western Australia and the forest within the karri FMU provides regionally significant habitat connectivity between larger forest areas (most of which are in the formal reserve system) the precautionary approach was adopted and this HCV was assessed as existing within the FMU.

HCV 2.2 Forests recognised as being regionally significant at the bioregion or larger scale in formally recognised reports or peer-reviewed journals, due to the unusual landscape*scale* biodiversity values provided by size and condition of the forest relative to regional forest land cover and land use trends. Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 30 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

The karri FMU is a subset of a much larger forest area (not just karri forest) within the South West of Western Australia, which is very well represented in both formal and informal reserves. Approximately 66 per cent of the 173 960 hectares of the State’s karri forest is within the reserve system. These forests have been less affected by forest management activity and they all contain areas of undisturbed forest.

Given the high amount of the karri forest in the formal reserve system, this HCV of “unusual landscape scale biodiversity values” was determined not to exist in the karri FMU.

HCV 2.3 Forests that provide regionally significant habitat connectivity between larger forest areas and/or refugia

The forest within the karri FMU provides regionally significant habitat connectivity between larger forest areas (most of which are in the formal reserve system) and this HCV was assessed as existing within the FMU.

HCV 2.4 Intact Forest Landscapes, wilderness areas, forests that are roadless, and/or have not been affected by forest management activity.

A search of the Global Forest Watch website / Intact Forest Landscapes was completed on January 2020 and there are no Intact Forest Landscapes (IFL) areas mapped by Global Forest Watch within the karri FMU.

HCV 2 Control Measures

HCV 2 is protected through a number of means, including through the allocation of informal reserve systems. These occupy an area of approximately 48 570 hectares in the karri FMU. Figures 2-A and 2-B show the boundaries of the informal reserves in the karri FMU. In areas where disturbance activity occurs, HCV 2 is protected by: ensuring landscape connectivity through the informal reserve system, limiting the size of harvest areas, and through other measures described below such as ensuring harvesting is within sustainable levels. These measures will also help to ensure harvest activities do not threaten values of the South West Australia biodiversity hotspot.

The FPC applies a comprehensive range of control measures to preserve these HCVs within the karri FMU. These measures carefully manage disturbance to levels that maintain structural diversity of the forest and to rapidly regenerate the forest. These include but are not limited to:

• Harvesting within sustainable timber yield levels as outlined in the ‘Productive Capacity’ section of the KFMP (Responsibility: Manager Production).

• Protection of karri forest in informal reserves throughout the karri FMU (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Clearfelling is currently limited by the FPC to regrowth karri forest with a maximum coupe size of 20 hectares, in line with the recommendations of the Ministerial Advisory Group on Karri and Tingle 1999 (refer to Silviculture Guideline for Karri Forest) (Parks and Wildlife, 2014a) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Thinning of regrowth stands to maintain productive capacity (Procedure FEM040 Karri – Thinning) (Parks and Wildlife, 2014b) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 31 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

• The Conservation and Parks Commission introduced Fauna Habitat Zones (FHZs) as a precautionary measure to act as refugia and provide structural diversity. The FPC does not harvest in FHZs, and the selection of the FHZs are as per the Guideline for the Selection of Fauna Habitat Zones (Parks and Wildlife, 2017b) (Responsibility: Parks and Wildlife Service Forest Management Branch).

• Following natural disturbance events (e.g. bushfire), the FPC will place a high priority on timber salvage and rehabilitation operations to ensure all natural values are returned as rapidly as possible. This will be guided by advice from the Parks and Wildlife Service and subject to available funding.

• Protection of water values through the implementation of informal reserves on all water courses (Guideline for the protection of the values of informal reserves and fauna habitat zones) (DEC, 2009a) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Protection of soil values by limiting soil disturbance to acceptable levels (Soil and Water Conservation Guideline) (DEC, 2009b) (Responsibility: Manager Production).

• Retention of habitat trees (Silviculture Guideline for Karri Forest) (Parks and Wildlife, 2014a) (Responsibility: Manager Silviculture).

• Ensuring all regeneration operations are successful (FEM069 Karri - regeneration survey for planted seedlings (Parks and Wildlife, 2016c) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• No use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in any regeneration operations is permitted and seed collected locally (usually from the same Land Management Unit) is used in regeneration operations (refer to the FPC’s Policy 9 Forest Management (FPC, 2019a) and Silviculture Guideline for Karri Forest) (Parks and Wildlife, 2014a) (Responsibility: Nursery and Seed Manager).

• Disturbed areas such as log landings, extraction tracks and basic raw material pits are rehabilitated (Guidelines for the Management and Rehabilitation of Basic Raw Material Pits) (DEC, 2008) (Responsibility: Manager Production).

• Ensuring that any conversion to non-forest uses (e.g. roads) only occurs in very limited areas and will enable, clear, substantial, additional secure long-term environmental and social benefits across the karri FMU as outlined in the ‘Productive Capacity’ section of the KFMP (Responsibility: Manager Production in conjunction with the Parks and Wildlife Service SFM Co-ordinator in the relevant region).

Note the Mandatory Control Measures given on Page 19 of the HCV framework do not apply to the karri FMU as Intact Forest Landscapes and undisturbed rainforest do not occur.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 32 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

High Conservation Value 3 – Ecosystems and habitats. Rare, threatened, or endangered ecosystems, habitats or refugia.

Ecosystems that are rare and/or threatened at a global, national or regional level. Distinctiveness in terms of size, quality (particularly lack of human disturbance), or location within the ecosystems geographic range may be considered in assessing ecosystem rarity.

Designation Descriptor Present

HCV 3.1 Ecosystems* (including rainforests) that are threatened, depleted or Yes poorly reserved at the IBRA* bioregion scale, or are subject to threatening processes predicted to substantially reduce their extent and function

HCV 3.2 Areas for conservation of important genes or genetically distinct Yes populations

HCV 3.3 Old-growth forests Yes

HCV 3.4 Remnant vegetation in heavily cleared landscapes and mature forest No in degraded landscapes

From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019).

HCV 3 Definitions

‘Mature Forest’: Mature Forests are forests that contain overstorey trees typically greater than 100 years old and beginning to develop structural features typically found in older forests, including large spreading crowns, tree hollows and stages of senescence.

‘Mature forest in degraded landscapes’: A forest area containing mature forest where mature forest is rare in the surrounding landscape and/or is reduced in extent such that it is inadequate in maintaining landscape or ecological functions. Thresholds for determining rareness and degradation shall be based on assessments by government agencies, peer reviewed literature, or assessments by recognised experts, and be considered at the landscape level.

‘Old-growth forest’: Ecologically mature forest where the effects of disturbances are now negligible.

Best Available Information for HCV 3

Includes, as applicable, mapping and other data on:

• Ecosystem protection and conservation status at IBRA scales; • Old-growth forest; • Forest cover and disturbance; • Forest maturity; and • Anthropogenic disturbance at the landscape scale.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 33 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

HCV3 Outcomes

HCV 3.1 Ecosystems* (including rainforests) that are threatened, depleted or poorly reserved at the IBRA* bioregion scale, or are subject to threatening processes predicted to substantially reduce their extent and function

Ecological communities are naturally occurring groups of plants, and animals and other organisms interacting in a unique habitat. They can be listed as threatened by the Minister for Environment.

All of the five forest ecosystems (Karri Main Belt, Karri Rate’s Tingle, Karri Red Tingle, Karri West Coast and Karri Yellow Tingle) recognised in karri dominant forest are well represented in the reserve system (Conservation Commission, 2013a, Appendix 6).

DBCA maintains information on poorly reserved forest ecosystems and less well reserved vegetation complexes. These are considered in forest management and are unavailable for harvest.

There are no declared threatened ecological communities (TECs) in the karri FMU, however there are priority ecological communities (PECs) present. Most are within informal reserves in the karri FMU and are excluded from harvesting. However, the PEC ‘Epiphytic cryptogams of the karri forest’ can occur beyond informal reserves in older or unburnt regrowth karri stands. This ecological community is comprised of liverworts, mosses and lichens growing on the bark of mature karri hazel (Trymalium odoratissimum subsp. odoratissimum) and karri oak (Chorilaena quercifolia), from approximately age 15 to the senescence at about age 50 (DBCA, 2019).

This HCV is assessed as present within the karri FMU.

HCV 3.2 Areas for conservation of important genes or genetically distinct populations

Analysis of the karri genome indicates a high genetic diversity within the species. Genetic differentiation throughout the main karri belt however, is low, aside from the lower Warren area, which is more closely related to the Karridale outlier population (Bradshaw, 2015).

The recently discovered population of Commersonia apella is disjunct from the only other extant population near Esperance. Being classed as Critically Endangered, this species is considered under HCV 1.1.

Under the precautionary principle, this HCV is deemed present within the karri FMU.

HCV 3.3 Old-growth forests

This HCV was assessed to exist within the karri FMU due to the presence of 13 280 hectares of Type 1 old-growth forest, all of which is excluded from disturbance activities. 6 510 hectares is karri old-growth forest. Under the previous HCV evaluation framework an additional 85 hectares of Type 2 old-growth forest has been identified within the production forest and will remain in temporary protection areas by the FPC. The remaining area of Type 2 old-growth forest is already in reserves. It is important to note that 100 per cent of the identified old-growth forest is reserved, well in excess of the 60 per cent required under the JANIS criteria.

In terms of the process for assessing old-growth forest, this was initially undertaken in the 1990s in the development of the Regional Forest Agreements. This process sought to map the areas of old-growth forest in accordance with the definition as set out in the National Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 34 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Forest Policy Statement 1992 and the criteria developed by JANIS5. The processes adopted are described in the following documents:

• Environment Forest Taskforce, Environment Australia & Conservation and Land Management 1997, ‘Comprehensive Regional Assessment of Old-Growth in Western Australia. Review of Data and methodology for Old-growth Mapping in the South West Forest region of Western Australia’, Perth, Australia.

• Bradshaw, F 1998, ‘Old Growth Mapping. A report prepared for the Western Australian Regional Forest Agreement’, Perth, Australia.

These assessments against the criteria resulted in the mapping of old-growth forest stands to a scale of two hectares. This is the smallest scale of old-growth mapping compared with other states in Australia. Australia’s State of the Forest Report recognises that ‘old-growth forests are usually identified in patches larger than 2-3 hectares’ (State of the Forest Report, 2013).

Critically this mapping found that in tall open eucalypt forests, all previous harvesting had resulted in a reduction in the canopy by 50 per cent or more and had initiated patches of regeneration. As per Bradshaw (1998, p.11) ‘… all karri areas that have previously been harvested are excluded from old growth [old-growth forest classification] on the grounds that the effects of disturbance to the overstorey are still apparent and more than negligible.’

Seral stage mapping was undertaken as part of the process of mapping old-growth forest (Bradshaw and Rayner, 1997a, b). This study adopted a conservative approach to mapping the old-growth forest extent by including all forests dominated by early mature as well as the late mature stages. The mapping techniques used could not reliably differentiate between early and late mature forest, which resulted in a much larger area of old-growth forest reservation. A consultancy for the Comprehensive Regional Assessment (CRA) for the RFA (McDonald, 1996) supported this methodology.

The assessment of old-growth forest is consistent with the process described above.

In addition, the FMP 2014 acknowledges that the total extent of old-growth forest can change over time due to: 1) a change in forest condition, where for karri forest this can be due to events such as bushfire; and 2) as datasets are refined or updated to reflect the field reality as closely as possible (Conservation Commission, 2013, p.34). Further, as part of pre-harvest planning, areas are thoroughly checked for the presence of old-growth forest even though an old-growth assessment has already been undertaken for that area before. This ensures that old-growth forest is correctly identified before any harvest activity occurs. As a result, previously unidentified old-growth forest may be discovered, or an area may be excluded from old-growth forest classification.

The HCV framework defines the minimum area threshold for HCV areas as “the smallest area in which the viability and integrity of that particular designation can be maintained, based on the best available scientific information, including recognised government and expert definitions and research” (FSC Australia, 2019, page 10). The minimum two hectare mapping threshold used in Western Australia (based on 0.5 hectare assessment units and the Comprehensive Regional Assessment) is the smallest scale of old-growth mapping compared with other states in Australia. Australia’s State of the Forest Report recognises that ‘Old-growth forests are usually identified in patches larger than 2-3 hectares’ (Montreal Process Implementation Group for Australia, 2013).

5 Joint ANZECC/MCFFA National Forest Policy Statement Implementation Sub-committee (1997). Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 35 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

The mapping of which our old-growth identification and protection is based, is from the Comprehensive Regional Assessment which in turn is based on scientific work published in a paper titled ‘Age structure of the karri forest: 1. Defining and mapping structural development stages’ (Bradshaw and Rayner, 1997). Through this work a minimum patch size of two hectares was classified as a stand.

Type 2 old-growth forest

The FPC considers the assessment of old-growth forest undertaken at the time of the RFA to be best practice and to provide adequate protection for this HCV. However, the FPC implemented additional measures to assess and protect Type 2 old-growth forest as defined by FSC Australia (2013, p.13). For a detailed overview of how Type 2 old-growth forest has been identified and protected please refer to the FPC’s Procedure 47 Identification, assessment and demarcation of Type 2 old-growth karri forest (FPC, 2018). This procedure explains how the FPC has identified Type 2 old-growth forest in accordance with FSC Australia’s definition, which includes ‘stands that have been logged, but which retain significant late successional/old-growth structure and functions’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p.13).

Significant late successional old-growth characteristics are found in the stands that are dominated by the senescent stage as described by Bradshaw and Rayner (1997a). These stands are estimated to typically be more than 200 to 250 years in age, with the stand dominated by a senescent component occupying more than 25 per cent of the canopy.

These areas were mapped during the CRA process for the RFA. The FPC has identified these areas as Type 2 old-growth forests and placed them into temporary protection areas. When the senescent trees no longer dominate the area, the area will be available for harvesting (with appropriate legacy and habitat elements retained).

The revised version of FSC Australia’s High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019) no longer distinguishes between Type 1 and Type 2 old- growth forest. The FPC will continue to protect all areas mapped as Type 2 old-growth forest under the previous framework.

Stakeholder consultation on old-growth forests

The areas initially defined as old-growth forest were open to stakeholder input which was subject to independent review. This review is reported in:

Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. 1998, ‘Regional Forest Agreement in Western Australia. Review of Old Growth Areas raised by Stakeholders’, Perth, Australia.

Additionally, an old-growth forest nomination process is available to the public through the Parks and Wildlife Service. More information is available on the Parks and Wildlife Service’s website.

The previous Conservation Commission’s public nomination process for old-growth forest was developed following extensive public consultation (refer to the Conservation Commission’s Assessment criteria and process for the Conservation Commission review of old-growth amendments – Consultation Paper).

In 2017, the Parks and Wildlife Service in consultation with the Conservation and Parks Commission finalised FEM075 Procedure for the assessment, identification and demarcation of old-growth forest (Parks and Wildlife, 2017). As outlined in the FMP 2014, the Parks and Wildlife Service has now taken over responsibility from the Conservation and Parks Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 36 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Commission for managing the system for nomination and assessment of old-growth forest (Conservation Commission, 2013a, p.42):

‘The Conservation [and Parks] Commission will maintain the system of public nominations and assessment of unmapped old-growth forest until the procedure referred to in activity 6.3 is finalised. Following finalisation of the procedure referred to in activity 6.36, the Department [Parks and Wildlife Service within the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions] will manage the system of public nominations and assessment of unmapped old- growth forest.’

The old-growth forest nomination process mentioned above does not include stakeholder consultation on Type 2 old-growth forest protection. Type 2 old-growth nomination, identification and protection can occur through the FPC’s stakeholder consultation processes (e.g. release of indicative one year harvest plans) and through feedback on the FPC’s KFMP and this HCV assessment.

HCV 3.4 Remnant vegetation in heavily cleared landscapes and mature forest in degraded landscapes

The karri forest retains approximately 82 per cent of its original extent (prior to European settlement) (Conservation Commission, 2013, Bradshaw, 2015). The Warren bioregion currently retains over 77% of its original (pre-European) vegetation (Government of Western Australia, 2019). These figures do not constitute a heavily cleared landscape.

Under the FMP 2014 approximately 62% or 1.4 million hectares of karri forest is protected in national parks, reserves and other areas not available for harvest. Within the karri FMU mature forest is not rare within the landscape or reduced in extent that it is inadequate in maintaining landscape or ecological functions. It should be noted that under the previous FMP there was a shift to a greater reliance on regrowth forests and increased protection of mature forest.

This HCV is assessed as not present in the karri FMU.

HCV 3 Control Measures

Within the karri FMU all ecosystems and vegetation complexes considered poorly reserved or depleted are set aside within conservation areas such as nature reserves, national parks, state forest classified as conservation area and informal reserves.

The online Disturbance Approval System (DAS) form, ensures that any threatened or priority ecological communities within or adjoining areas proposed to be disturbed are identified prior to operations. If any are identified, further action is taken under the direction of the Parks and Wildlife Service e.g. a field survey may be required (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

Control measures to protect old growth forest include:

• All Type 1 old-growth forests that have been identified have been placed in formal or informal reserves. Areas identified as Type 2 old-growth forest will remain in temporary protection areas by the FPC. The total area of old-growth forest is shown

6 The procedure referred to in activity 6.3 is as follows (p. 41 of FMP 2014): ‘develop a procedure to identify and demarcate old-growth forest by 30 June 2016, in consultation with the Conservation Commission’.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 37 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

in Figures 2-A and 2-B (Responsibility: Parks and Wildlife Service Forest Management Branch and Manager Forest Management).

• All proposed harvest coupes containing mature karri forest are inspected for the presence of old-growth forest. If any forest meeting the old-growth definition is found to exist, the area is added to Parks and Wildlife Service’s corporate data layer and the area is demarcated out of the proposed harvest operation and excluded from harvesting (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Any member of the public can identify and nominate an area of forest as potential old-growth forest by completing an old-growth forest nomination form and submitting it to the Parks and Wildlife Service.

• The Parks and Wildlife Service reviews public nominations and determines whether any old-growth forest exists. If the presence of old-growth forest is verified, it is placed in informal reserves.

• A list of old-growth public nominations and assessments undertaken from 2005 to April 2017 are provided on the Conservation and Parks Commission’s website. Assessments conducted since March 2017 are provided on the Parks and Wildlife Service’s website (Responsibility: Conservation and Parks Commission and Parks and Wildlife Services).

• Prior to harvesting, the FPC will initiate a further assessment for Type 2 old-growth forest using most recent digital imagery as per Procedure 47 Identification, assessment, and demarcation of Type 2 old-growth karri forest (FPC, 2018a). If identified, the extent of the area will be verified and this will subsequently be excluded from harvesting and classified as a temporary protection area.

• The FPC’s procedure for Type 2 old-growth protection ensures that all areas of identified Type 2 old-growth forest are unavailable for harvesting. This procedure was developed through input from the Parks and Wildlife Service. As previously mentioned, broader stakeholder consultation on Type 2 old-growth forest protection can occur through the FPC’s stakeholder consultation processes (e.g. release of indicative one year harvest plans) and through consultation on the FPC’s KFMP and this HCV assessment. A copy of the FPC’s Procedure 47 Identification, assessment, and demarcation of Type 2 old-growth karri forest (FPC, 2018a), is available on the FPC’s website.

Note the Mandatory Control Measure in the framework (page 23) – “demonstrate that wood is not sourced from Old Growth Forest” is addressed through existing control measures.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 38 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Figure 2-A: Old-growth forests, temporary protection areas containing type 2 old- growth forest and formal and informal reserves in the karri Forest Management Unit

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 39 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Figure 2-B: Old-growth forests, temporary protection areas containing type 2 old- growth forest and formal and informal reserves in the karri Forest Management Unit

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 40 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

High Conservation Value 4 – Basic ecosystem services in critical situations Basic ecosystem services in critical situations, including protection of water catchments and control of erosion of vulnerable soils and slopes.

Designation Description Present

HCV 4.1 Areas that provide protection from flooding No

HCV 4.2 Areas that provide protection from erosion No

HCV 4.3 Areas that provide barriers to the spread of destructive fires No

HCV 4.4 Areas that provide clean water catchments Yes

From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019).

HCV 4 Definitions

‘Critical situations’: An ecosystem service is considered to be ‘critical’ where a disruption of that service is likely to cause, or poses a threat of, severe negative impacts on the welfare, health or survival of local communities, on the environment, on High Conservation Values, or on the functioning of significant infrastructure (roads, dams, buildings, etc.). The notion of criticality here refers to the importance and risk for natural resources and environmental and socioeconomic values.

Best Available Information for HCV 4

Includes, as applicable, mapping, reports, expert consultation and other data on:

• Flood risk; • Soil erodibility and erosion risk; • Fire risk and behaviour in the landscape; and • Water catchment location and water quality

HCV 4 Outcomes

HCV 4.1 Protection from Flooding

In certain situations, forest management has the potential to influence flood risk, particularly in the 5 years after harvest. Roberts (2014) concluded that flood protection provided by forests may be diminished if more than 20% of a catchment of a defined floodplain was harvested within a 5 year period, a scenario determined as improbable in the study area of Tasmania.

Defined floodplains and wetlands have not been identified in or downstream of the karri FMU (DWER, no date). The scale of harvesting is set in the FMP with consideration to the protection of soil and water resources. This HCV is assessed as not present in the karri FMU.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 41 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

HCV 4.2 Protection from Erosion

Forest areas critical to erosion control are those fundamental in protecting against the instability of landslides, avalanches and severe erosion. Criticality at this level is assessed as not being present within the karri FMU.

Erosion risk is assessed prior to operations. The Soil and Water section of the KFMP describes FPCs management of erosion risk.

HCV 4.3 Barriers to Destructive Fire

The karri forest system is heavily influenced by fire, with the karri tree itself being reliant on fire disturbance for its regeneration. See the Ecosystem Health and Vitality section of the KFMP for more details.

It is unlikely that any of the karri FMU provides a significant barrier to destructive fire. Destructive fires can burn unchecked through very large areas, as demonstrated by the 2015 Northcliffe fire where over 95,000 hectares were burnt.

Hazard reduction burning conducted by the Parks and Wildlife Service is the main tool to reduce fuel loads and potentially check large fires.

This HCV is assessed as not present within the karri FMU.

HCV 4.4 Clean water catchments

This HCV is present within and adjacent to the karri FMU. The karri FMU contains a significant proportion of the Lefroy Brook Catchment Area, which provides drinking water (via Big Brook Dam) to Pemberton, which has a population of approximately 974 people. Also contained within the top end of the Lefroy Brook Catchment are the Manjimup (Scabby Gully) and Phillips Creek Dam catchments. These dams are the main sources of drinking water for the town of Manjimup, which has a population of approximately 4 300 people.

The areas containing this HCV in the karri FMU are:

Big Brook sub catchment – total on State forest and Crown land – 2 500 hectares, of which the reservoir area is 20 hectares, and stream and river zones are 390 hectares.

Lefroy Brook sub-catchment – total on State forest and Crown land – 1 590 hectares, of which stream and river zones are 160 hectares.

Manjimup Dam sub-catchment – total on State forest and Crown land – 750 hectares of which the reservoir area is 20 hectares, stream and river zones are 40 hectares.

Philips Creek sub-catchment – total on State forest and Crown land – 30 hectares, of which stream and river zones are 1 hectare.

Other stream and river reserves are located on all watercourses and occupy 21 510 hectares within the karri FMU.

A significant proportion of the karri FMU also contains the Warren River Water Reserve. Under the Country Areas Water Supply Act 1947 a ‘Licence to Clear’ is required to be obtained by the FPC from the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation to facilitate harvest and regeneration activity. The FPC has a licence to clear (licence number

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 42 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

LPR1022) in state forest within the Warren River Water Reserve, which is valid until 31 December 2023. Figures 3-A and 3-B show an overlay of the FMU with the Lefroy Brook, Warren River and Donnelly River Catchment areas. This water resource is not currently being used for public water supply.

HCV 4 Control Measures

See also the Soil and Water section in the KFMP.

The FPC applies a comprehensive range of control measures to preserve this HCV, including but not limited to:

• All operations must comply with the Parks and Wildlife Service’s Soil and Water Conservation Guideline (DEC, 2009b) (Responsibility: Manager Production)

• Protection of water values through the implementation of informal reserves on all water courses which are demarcated and protected in accordance with the Parks and Wildlife Service’s Guideline for the protection of the values of informal reserves and fauna habitat zones (DEC, 2009a) and Soil and Water Conservation Guideline (DEC, 2009b) (Responsibility: Manager Production)

• In accordance with the Manual of Procedures for the Management of Soils Associated With Timber Harvesting in Native Forests (Parks and Wildlife, 2015) the following measures occur: (Responsibility: Manager Production)

• Risk assessments are conducted for soil damage and erosion as well as waterlogging and the contamination of water courses.

• Landform maps are prepared by the Parks and Wildlife Service for coupes nominated by the FPC for moist soil access. During all operations, monitoring is undertaken for soil damage and contamination of soil and water. Harvesting is to cease if limits are exceeded or are likely to be exceeded.

• Rehabilitation occurs if soil damage is assessed as being excessive.

• Clearfelling in karri forest is currently limited by the FPC to regrowth karri forest. A maximum coupe size of 20 hectares in regrowth forest is applied in line with the Ministerial Advisory Group on Karri and Tingle 1999 and contained in the Parks and Wildlife Service’s Silviculture Guideline for Karri Forest (Parks and Wildlife, 2014a) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management)

• A Licence to Clear is obtained by the FPC from the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation to facilitate harvest and regeneration activities within the Warren River Water Reserve (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

Note the Mandatory control measures given in the HCV Framework – ‘Harvesting Codes of Practice shall be adhered to’ , and “In circumstances where there is a high risk of erosion or history of issues related to erosion, then additional management may be required” are both addressed by existing control measures.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 43 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Figure 3-A: Water catchments and public drinking water source areas in the karri Forest Management Unit

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 44 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Figure 3-B: Water catchments and public drinking water source areas in the karri Forest Management Unit

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 45 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

High Conservation Value 5 – Community needs Forest areas fundamental to meeting basic needs of local communities (e.g. subsistence, health).

A site or resource is fundamental for satisfying basic needs if the services it provides are irreplaceable (ie., if alternatives are not readily accessible or affordable), and if its loss or damage would cause serious suffering to affected stakeholders. HCV5 is most likely to be more important in areas where whole communities or significant portions of them are heavily dependent on those ecosystems for their livelihoods, and where there is limited availability of alternatives. In general, if local people are dependent on Indigenous or traditionally managed ecosystems, HCV5 may be present.

Designation Descriptor Present

HCV 5.1 Unique/main sources of water fundamental for drinking and No other daily uses

HCV 5.2 Unique/main sources of water fundamental for the irrigation of No subsistence food crops.

HCV 5.3 Food and medicines fundamental for local traditional No indigenous uses

From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019).

HCV 5 Definitions

‘Basic human needs’: Local people use the area to obtain resources on which they are critically dependent. Potential fundamental basic needs include, but are not limited to: unique sources of water for drinking and other daily uses; food, medicine, fuel, building and craft resources; the production of food crops and subsistence cash crops; protection of “agricultural” plots against adverse microclimate, and traditional farming practices.

‘Fundamental’: Loss of the resources from this area would have a significant impact in the supply of the resource and decrease local community well-being.

Best Available Information for HCV 5

Includes:

Mapping, reports, expert and stakeholder consultation and other data on unique and primary sources of water for daily uses and the location of areas that provide traditional food and medicines.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 46 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

HCV 5 Outcomes

This HCV is deemed not present within the karri FMU because it is not considered that ‘local people use the area to obtain resources on which they are critically dependent’. The karri FMU is used by the local community as a source of firewood; however this is not a source of fuel on which the local community is critically dependent as there are other sources of wood available and many other sources of energy available for heating, cooking and other uses. The Parks and Wildlife Service does make available areas where the public can collect firewood within the FMU, subject to strict conditions to ensure that HCVs are not threatened.

HCV 5.1 Unique/main sources of water fundamental for drinking and other daily uses

The FMU is indirectly a source of water for the towns of Manjimup and Pemberton, this aspect is covered in the HCV 4.4 section.

As the intention of this HCV is directed towards resources critical for basic human needs of subsistence and health, it does not apply to the context of the karri FMU.

HCV 5.2 Unique/main sources of water fundamental for the irrigation of subsistence food crops.

Subsistence farming is linked to low levels of economic development and is generally not applicable to an Australian context.

HCV 5.3 Food and medicines fundamental for local traditional indigenous uses

Given the large proportion of karri forest in the reserve system, the karri FMU is unlikely to provide a unique source of food and medicines considered fundamental to local traditional indigenous uses. Noongar people are authorised to access land managed by the Parks and Wildlife Service to undertake customary activities (See HCV 6.6).

The FPC remains open and receptive to stakeholder feedback on the presence of HCVs within its operational areas.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 47 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

High Conservation Value 6 – Cultural values Sites, resources, habitats and landscapes of global or national cultural, archaeological or historical significance, and/or of critical cultural, ecological, economic or religious/sacred importance for the traditional cultures of local communities or Indigenous Peoples, identified through engagement with these local communities or Indigenous Peoples.

Designation Description Present

HCV 6.1 Aesthetic values Yes

HCV 6.2 Historic values of global or national cultural or archaeological Yes significance

HCV 6.3 Long term research sites Yes

HCV 6.4 Social (including economic) values Yes

HCV 6.5 Spiritual and cultural values Yes

From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2019).

HCV6 Definitions

‘Cultural Significance’ The HCV Framework has adopted the ICOMOS Burra Charter definition of Cultural Significance which is recognised at all levels of government and in legislation in Australia:

“Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects. Places may have a range of values for different individuals or groups.”

The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter of Places of Cultural Significance 1999.

Best Available Information for HCV 6:

• Mapping • Reports • Databases • Field Surveys • Expert and knowledgeable stakeholder consultation • Consultation with identified Traditional Owners and other relevant Indigenous interests

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 48 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

HCV 6 Outcomes

HCV 6.1 Aesthetic values

Visual and aesthetic values exist throughout the karri FMU. Maintaining visual amenity and providing an aesthetically pleasing environment contributes to the quality of life for local communities and can also support nature-based tourism.

Visual landscape management practices seek to ensure the FPC’s harvesting operations are planned and implemented to complement, rather than detract from, the inherent visual qualities of the landscape. Well planned silvicultural practice can reduce visual impact by introducing variations of gap size, thinning intensity, felling cycle, rotation length and treatment method. Buffer zones are also applied in areas adjacent to major roads and recreation sites.

HCV 6.2 Historic values of global or national cultural or archaeological significance Note that Noongar values are addressed under HCV 6.5.

Non-Aboriginal cultural heritage

There are significant non–Aboriginal heritage sites within the karri FMU and therefore this HCV is considered to exist within the FMU. Some examples of other Australian culture within or adjacent to the karri FMU include old school sites, old tramways and trestle bridges, and sleeper cutter camps.

As part of pre-harvest planning non-Aboriginal cultural heritage sites are identified using the following resources:

• The Heritage Council of Western Australia has information on the location of protected buildings, structures and sites.

• The Local Government Historical Municipal Inventory provides a range of sites from structures to heritage trees.

• Parks and Wildlife Service harvest coupe base maps.

• Parks and Wildlife Service corporate data: Maps, Data Druid and Recreation and Tourism Information Service (RATIS).

Liaison with Parks and Wildlife Service district staff will occur to ensure the Parks and Wildlife Service’s checklist relating to identifying and protecting other Australian heritage sites is followed. FPC staff will report cultural sites to the Parks and Wildlife Service for entry into their RATIS system if they have not already been entered.

HCV 6.3 Long term research sites There are areas of scientific value considered to be present in the karri FMU, these include long-term silvicultural trials. For example, in Big Brook State forest, there is a scientific research site that has been left undisturbed and unburnt since it was regenerated in the 1930s.

As part of pre-harvest planning, areas containing research plots, and scientific or soil reference areas are noted. Such sites are identified to ensure measures are taken to make sure harvest activities do not impact on their integrity.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 49 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

HCV 6.4 Social (including economic) values Social and economic values of the forest, such as for recreation, honey production, flora collection, firewood and fishing are outside FPCs managerial control and are overseen by Parks and Wildlife. These are described in “Other Forest Products” in the Karri Forest Management Plan.

HCV 6.5 Spiritual and cultural values

Noongar heritage

The initial assessment results are shown in Table 3 which lists all the registered Noongar sites and other heritage places in the general vicinity of the karri FMU. The registered sites are also shown in Figures 4-A and 4-B. It is acknowledged that there are likely to be other unregistered sites within the karri FMU and processes are in place to identify and protect these. In some instances these sites are not made available to the public to protect their integrity.

The sites presented in Table 3 are held in the Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry System database and are assessed under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA). ‘Registered sites’ are assessed as meeting Section 5 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. Those sites considered ‘Other Heritage Places’ may have been assessed as not meeting Section 5 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (status is ‘stored data/not a site’) or may not have yet been assessed (status is ‘lodged’).

Table 3: List of Noongar and other heritage sites in the karri FMU and surrounding environment*

*This list was last updated in January 2020.

Site Site name Status Site type Access Easting Northing

Registered sites within FMU

Registered Man-Made 5781 Dingup Open 426639 6209647 site Structure

Registered 17123 Muirs Highway Site 5 Artefacts/Scatter Open 424255 6208811 site

Registered 20434 Blackwood River Mythological Open 423713 6243153 site

Registered sites outside FMU (within 1 km)

Registered Skeletal 4563 Manjimup Burials Open 427499 6208091 site material/Burial

17296 Northcliffe Silcrete Artefacts/Scatter, Open 408019 6170097 Quarry Quarry, Registered Archaeological site deposit, BP Dating: 7000, Other: Charcoal

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 50 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Site Site name Status Site type Access Easting Northing

17297 Dombakup Artefacts/Scatter, Open 407169 6169247 Registered Archaeological Sites Archaeological site deposit

Other heritage places within FMU

4570 Lefroy Fish Traps Lodged Fish Trap Open 412654 6183729

Stored 4936 Old Mill 1 data/not a Artefacts/Scatter Open 413639 6199647 site

Man-Made 5723 Lefroy Brook Lodged Open 410639 6191647 Structure

5774 Pemberton Lodged Artefacts/Scatter Open 406639 6172647

Mythological, Muirs Highway 17127 Lodged Natural Feature, Open 433965 6212539 Ethnographic Site 3 Water Source

Stored Donnelly River and 17979 data/not a Mythological Open 399056 6208648 Associated Wetlands site

20213 Phillips Creek Lodged Mythological Open 415082 6208215

Mythological, Stored Camp, Hunting 21907 Tone River data/not a Open 470800 6210845 Place, Water site Source

Yeriminup/Frankland Stored Camp, Hunting 21909 Hunting and Camping data/not a Open 491263 6196983 Place Areas site

Mythological, 29672 Deep River Lodged Open 461894 6166275 Natural Feature

Other Heritage Places outside FMU (within 1 km)

Stored Ceremonial, Manjimup Ceremonial 4569 data/not a Historical, Camp, Open 424141 6199957 Grounds (Mica Hill) site Meeting Place

Artefacts/Scatter, 5772 Manjimup Lodged Open 423939 6205411 Camp

Artefacts/Scatter, Other: All seen 5779 Manjimup Lodged artefacts were Open 422639 6210647 collected from this site

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 51 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Site Site name Status Site type Access Easting Northing

5782 Muirillup Rock Man-Made Open 430639 6165647 Lodged Structure

Stored Mythological, Muirs Highway 17126 data/not a Natural Feature, Open 453990 6212114 Ethnographic Site 2 site Water Source

Artefacts/Scatter, Historical, Mythological, Archaelogical 29676 Boonwiup Pool Lodged Deposit, Named Open 447153 6194695 Place, Natural Feature, Water Source, Other: dated evidence

Due to the presence of the registered sites listed in Table 3 this HCV is assessed to exist in the karri FMU.

The FPC recognises that Noongar people are the traditional owners of the lands and waters of South West Western Australia and specifically on lands upon which the FPC carries out planning and operational activities. Therefore, it is important to acknowledge the connection that Noongar peoples have with the land and waters in the South West, aside from ensuring the protection of specific Noongar heritage sites. This is further elaborated within the FPC’s document Statement of Commitment: Engagement with Noongar Peoples in the South West of Western Australia (FPC, 2015).

Noongar people may be authorised to access land managed by the Parks and Wildlife Service to undertake customary activities. The FPC will cooperate with the Parks and Wildlife Service to help facilitate such access where it relates to areas the FPC temporarily utilises for harvest, forest treatment and replanting activities.

HCV 6 Control Measures

The range of strategies to preserve this HCV within the karri FMU include:

• Visual landscape management is a consideration of the planning process. Where a landscape has both high visual quality and high visitation, it is assigned a high priority for visual landscape management, and modified practices are used. Higher levels of landscape alteration are permitted where there are reduced visual resource values and lower usage patterns.

• Checks for trees registered on the Parks and Wildlife Service’s significant tree register. Significant trees can be significant due to their uniqueness in terms of size or appearance and/or they may be considered a natural phenomenon. The Parks and Wildlife Service and FPC staff may identify potential significant trees as part of the pre-harvest planning process. Members of the public may also nominate trees to be included in the register.

• Checks for other uses in the area, such as for recreational activities and events.

• Searches of databases identifying apiary sites. Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 52 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

• Searches of relevant databases, such as the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry System, to determine the location of registered Noongar sites prior to any disturbance activity (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Maintaining consultation and liaison with traditional spokespersons/custodians including field visits (where applicable) and formal liaison with SWALSC, to ensure the protection of registered heritage sites. This consultation is also important to help with the identification and management of any possible unregistered sites (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• The FPC has entered into Noongar Standard Heritage Agreements (NSHAs) with SWALSC for the relevant Indigenous Land Use Areas (ILUAs) within the karri FMU.

• The FPC will provide an activity notice as required by the NSHA for activities that may impact aboriginal heritage. Low ground disturbance activities, as agreed in a Letter of Understanding (LOU) between SWALSC and the FPC, do not require an activity notice.

• Staff are provided with training to assist them in identifying possible Noongar heritage sites (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• The FPC will also work cooperatively with appropriate native title claim groups (and their legal representative bodies) within areas of the FPC’s operations that potentially impact on native title or cultural interests (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Searches of databases such as the Heritage Council of Western Australia’s State Heritage Register and the Local Government Historical Municipal Inventory (available on the relevant Shire’s website), and the Parks and Wildlife Service’s Recreation and Tourism Information System (RATIS) are undertaken to identify non-Aboriginal sensitive sites (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• The FPC and the Parks and Wildlife Service staff undertaking other management activities will report the presence of structures that may be of other heritage value, (e.g. railway formations, early settlements or gravesites) that may not have been previously recorded (Responsibility: Operations Officers).

• The locations of any confirmed known sites of heritage value and/or significant trees are incorporated into the Parks and Wildlife Service’s Geographic Information System (GIS) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• Where applicable the FPC will use buffer or exclusion zones to protect identified values such as aesthetic values, trees on the Significant tree register and sites of cultural heritage significance (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).

• The FPC will operate in accordance with the FPC’s Procedure 44 Observing native title rights and identifying and protecting Aboriginal heritage in the defined forest area and share-farms (FPC, 2018b) (Responsibility: Manager Production, Manager Forest Management and Manager Planning and Aboriginal Heritage).

• Where appropriate modify management activities to ensure the protection of Noongar and non-Aboriginal cultural values, scientific, and aesthetic and social values (Responsibility: Manager Production).

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 53 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Figure 4-A: Noongar and other heritage sites in the karri Forest Management Unit (and within 1km)

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 54 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Figure 4-B: Noongar and other heritage sites in the karri Forest Management Unit (and within 1km)

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 55 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

References

Bain, K (2020) ‘Table of endemic species within the karri FMU and southwest WA.’ Prepared for the Forest Products Commission. Python Ecological Services. Walpole, Australia

Bradshaw, F 2015. 'Reference material for karri forest silviculture', Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.

Bradshaw, F & Rayner, M 1997a. 'Age structure of the karri forest: 1. Defining and mapping structural development stages'. Australian Forestry, Vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 178-187.

--- 1997b. 'Age structure of the karri forest: 2. Projections of future forest structure and implications for management'. Australian Forestry, Vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 188-195.

Bradshaw, FJ 1998. 'Old Growth Mapping. A report prepared for the Western Australian Regional Forest Agreement', Perth, Australia.

Burrows, N, Dell, B, Neyland, M & Ruprecht, J 2011. 'Review of silviculture in forests of south-west Western Australia', Perth, Australia.

Christensen, P 1992. The karri forest, Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth, Australia.

Christensen, P, Liddelow, G & Hearn, R 2005. The Forest Fauna Distribution Information System. Assessment of vertebrate fauna prior to disturbance – timber harvesting and prescribed burning in the forests of Western Australia, Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth, Australia.

Commonwealth of Australia 1995. 'National Forest Policy Statement', Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra, Australia.

--- 1998. 'Comprehensive regional assessment. Western Australia Comprehensive Regional Assessment Report, Volume 1 and 2', Joint Commonwealth and Western Australian RFA Steering Committee, Perth, Australia.

--- n.d. Biodiversity hotspots [Online]. Available: https://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/conservation/hotspots [Accessed 2 June 2016].

Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Western Australia 1999. 'Regional Forest Agreement for the South-West Forest Region of Western Australia', Commonwealth and Western Australian Regional Forest Agreement Steering Committee, Canberra, Australia.

(Conservation Commission) Conservation Commission of Western Australia 2013. 'Forest Management Plan 2014-2023', Perth, Australia.

Conservation International n.d. Hotspots [Online]. Available: http://www.conservation.org/How/Pages/Hotspots.aspx [Accessed 2 June 2016].

Crisp, MD, Laffan, S, Linder, HP & Monro, A 2001. 'Endemism in the Australian flora'. Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 183-198.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 56 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund n.d. Southwest Australia [Online]. Available: http://www.cepf.net/resources/hotspots/Asia-Pacific/Pages/Southwest-Australia.aspx [Accessed 21 June 2016].

CSIRO 2014 Where are potential climate refugia? [Online]. Available: https://adaptnrm.csiro.au/biodiversity-options/measures-for-helping-biodiversity- adapt/where-are-potential-climate-refugia/ [Accessed 17 Feb 2020]. (DBCA) Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions 2018. ‘Disturbance Approval System', Perth, Australia.

--- 2019a. 'Conservation Codes for Western Australian Flora and Fauna', Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Perth, Australia.

--- 2019b Priority Ecological Communities for Western Australia, Version 28. Species and Communities Program, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Perth, Australia

(DEC) Department of Environment and Conservation 2008. 'Guidelines for the Management and Rehabilitation of Basic Raw Material Pits', Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, Australia.

--- 2009a. 'Guidelines for Protection of the Values of Informal Reserves and Fauna Habitat Zones', Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, Australia.

--- 2009b. 'Soil and Water Conservation Guideline', Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, Australia.

--- 2009c. ‘Majestic Spider Orchid (Caladenia winfieldii) Recovery Plan’. Commonwealth Deperatment of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra

(DWER) Department of Water and Environmental Regulation. No date [online] ‘Floodplain Mapping Tool’. Available http://www.water.wa.gov.au/maps-and-data/maps/flood- maps [Accessed 28 February 2020].

Environment Forest Taskforce, Environment Australia & Conservation and Land Management 1997. 'Comprehensive Regional Assessment of Old-Growth in Western Australia. Review of Data and methodology for Old-growth Mapping in the South West Forest region of Western Australia', Perth, Australia.

(FPC) Forest Products Commission 2013. 'Data audit and gap analysis', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.

--- 2015. ‘Statement of Commitment: Engagement with Noongar Peoples in the South West of Western Australia’, Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.

--- 2018a. 'Identification, assessment, and demarcation of Type 2 old-growth karri forest. Procedure 47', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia

--- 2018b. ‘Observing native title rights and identifying and protecting Aboriginal heritage in the defined forest area and share-farms’ Procedure 44', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia. --- 2018c. ‘Reconciliation action plan’, Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 57 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

--- 2019a. ‘Policy 9 Forest management’, Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.

--- 2019b. 'Targeted fauna surveys within pure and mixed karri forest. Procedure 46', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.

--- 2019c. ‘Aspects and Impacts Register’, Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia

--- 2020. 'Karri forest management plan', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.

(FSC Australia) Forest Stewardship Council Australia 2019. 'High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework', FSC Australia, Melbourne, Australia.Hopper, S, Keighery, G & Wardell-Johnson, G 1992. 'Flora of the karri forest and other communities in the Warren Botanical Subdistrict of Western Australia', Occasional Paper 9/92, Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth, Australia.

Hopper, SD & Gioia, P 2004. 'The southwest Australian floristic region: evolution and conservation of a global hot spot of biodiversity'. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Vol., no. pp. 623-650. (JANIS) Joint ANZECC/MCFFA National Forest Policy Statement Implementation Sub- committee 1997. 'Nationally Agreed Criteria for the Establishment of a Comprehensive, Adequate and Representative Reserve System for Forests in Australia', Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, Australia. Lyons, MN, Keighery, GJ, Gibson, N & Wardell-Johnson, G 2000. ‘The vascular flora of the Warren bioregion, south-west Western Australia: composition, reservation status and endemism.’ CALMScience 3(2): 181-250. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth Australia.

Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. 1998. 'Regional Forest Agreement in Western Australia. Review of Old Growth Areas raised by Stakeholders', Perth, Australia.

McDonald, P 1996. 'CRA – Old growth assessment W.A. consultancy Paul McDonald 6th to 9th November 1996 field inspections', Western Australia.

McKenzie, NL, May, JE & McKenna S (eds). 2002 ‘Bioregional Summary of the 2002 Biodiversity Audit for Western Australia’. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth, Australia

Montreal Process Implementation Group for Australia 2013. ‘Australia’s State of the Forests Report’. Bureau of Rural Sciences. Canberra, ACT

Morgan, DL, Gill, HS & Potter, IC. 1998. Distribution, identification and biology of freshwater fishes in south-western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum. Supplement No. 56. Perth, Australia

Myers, N, Mittermeier, RA, Mittermeier, CG, Da Fonseca, GA & Kent, J 2000. 'Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities'. Nature, Vol. 403, no. 6772, pp. 853-858.

(Parks and Wildlife) Department of Parks and Wildlife 2007. NatureMap: Mapping Western Australia's Biodiversity [Online]. Department of Parks and Wildlife. Available: https://naturemap.dpaw.wa.gov.au/ [Accessed 23 June 2016]. --- 2014. ‘Karri treemarking ready reckoner. Field Guide FEM039’, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 58 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

--- 2014b. ‘Karri - tree marking for retention. Procedure FEM035’, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.

--- 2014a. 'Silviculture Guideline for Karri Forest', Department of Parks and Wildlife Perth, Australia.

--- 2014b. 'Karri – Thinning. Procedure FEM040', Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.

--- 2015. ‘Conserving threatened species and ecological communities. Corporate policy statement No. 35’, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Perth, Australia. --- 2015. 'Manual of Procedures for the Management of Soils Associated with Timber Harvesting in Native Forests. Forest and Ecosystem Division Manual No. 1', Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.

--- 2016c. ‘Karri - Regeneration survey for planted seedlings. Procedure FEM069’, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.

--- 2017b. 'Guideline for the Selection of Fauna Habitat Zones', Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.

---2017, ‘Procedure for the assessment, identification and demarcation of old-growth forest. Procedure FEM075’, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.Roberts, S 2014. ‘Forests which provide protection from flooding.’ Consultant report to Forestry Tasmania.

Slatyer, C, Rosauer, D & Lemckert, F 2007. 'An assessment of endemism and species richness patterns in the Australian Anura'. Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 583-596.

Wardell-Johnson, G. and Coates, D. 1996. ‘Links to the past: local endemism in four species of forest eucalypts in southwestern Australia’. Pages 137-54 in “Gondwanan Heritage: Past, Present and Future of the Western Australian Biota”, edited by S.D. Hopper et al. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, 1996.

Wardell-Johnson, G. and Horwitz, P. (1996) ‘Conserving biodiversity and the recognition of heterogeneity in ancient landscapes: a case study from south western Australia.’ Forest Ecology and Management. Vol .85, pp. 219-238.

Wardell-Johnson, G. and Horwitz, P. (2000) ‘The recognition of heterogeneity and restricted endemism in the management of forested ecosystems in south western Australia.’ Australian Forestry. Vol .63, No. 3 pp. 218-225.

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 59 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Appendix 1 – Shortened forms

DBCA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (In 2017, the Department of Parks and Wildlife was merged with the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority, the Zoological Parks Authority, and the Rottnest Island Authority to form the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA). The Parks and Wildlife Service is within the DBCA.

DAS Disturbance Approval System

FDIS Fauna Distribution Information System

FHZs Fauna Habitat Zones

FMP Forest Management Plan guides the forest management practices and sets out the broad strategies, performance indicators and measurable outcomes for forest management of Western Australia’s state forests over a ten-year period

FMU Forest Management Unit

FPC Forest Products Commission

FSC Forest Stewardship Council

GIS Geographic Information System

GMOs Genetically Modified Organisms

HCVs High Conservation Values

HCV assessment Karri Forest HCV Assessment

IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia

ILUAs Indigenous Land Use Areas

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

KFMP Karri Forest Management Plan

LOU Letter of Understanding

NGOs Non-Government Organisations

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 60 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

NSHAs Noongar Standard Heritage Agreements

RATIS Recreation and Tourism Information System

RFA Regional Forest Agreement

SWALSC South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council

TSSC Threatened Species Scientific Committee

WA Western Australia

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 61 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed

Karri forest HCV assessment

Appendix 2 – Legislation relevant to the karri FMU Western Australian legislation

- Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 - Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 1974 - Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Western Australia) Act 1995 - Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 - Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2018 - Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007 - Bush Fires Act 1954 - Bush Fires Regulations 1954 - Conservation and Land Management Act 1984 - Conservation and Land Management Regulations 2002 - Contaminated Sites Act 2003 - Corruption and Crime Commission Act 2003 - Country Areas Water Supply Act 1947 - Country Areas Water Supply By-laws 1957 - Criminal Code 1913 - Emergency Management Act 2005 - Forest Management Regulations 1993 - Environmental Protection Act 1986 - Equal Opportunity Act 1984 - Forest Products Act 2000 - Health Act 1911 - Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990 - Industrial Relations Act 1979 - Metropolitan Water Supply Sewerage and Drainage Act 1909 - Minimum Conditions of Employment Act 1993 - Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 - Public Sector Management Act 2001 - Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 - Soil and Land Conservation Act 1945 - Water Agencies (Powers) Act 1984 - Waterways Conservation Act 1976

Commonwealth legislation

- Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 - Native Title Act 1993

Version control: V05/June 2020 Page 62 of 62 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed