Karri forest HCV assessment June 2018
/fpcwa www.fpc.wa.gov.au Copyright © 2018, 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 2018, ‘Karri forest HCV assessment’, Perth, Australia.
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]
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 1 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Contents
Executive summary 3
Background 5
High Conservation Value 1 – Species diversity 8
High Conservation Value 2 – Landscape-level ecosystems and mosaics 22
High Conservation Value 3 – Ecosystems and habitats 27
High Conservation Value 4 – Critical ecosystem services 36
High Conservation Value 5 – Community needs 42
High Conservation Value 6 – Cultural values 44
References 53
Appendix 1 – Shortened forms 56
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 2 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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, 2013). 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 a number of 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. Priority ecological communities are excluded from harvesting. 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 The karri FMU contains ecosystems that are rare. HCV 3 values present within the karri FMU includes old-growth forest (both Type 1 and Type 2 old-growth), and genetically distinct populations that are important for conservation. 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. 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, irrigation supply systems and support for threatened and priority aquatic species. 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 in the Karri FMU, as local communities are not critically dependant on the resources in the karri FMU to meet their basic needs. However, the karri FMU is a source of water for some regional areas, but this is covered in HCV 4 section. The Parks and Wildlife Service within the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 3 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Attractions designates areas where the public can collect firewood within the karri FMU. This is undertaken under strict conditions to protect HCVs. 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.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 4 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Background
This karri forest HCV assessment (HCV assessment) should also be read in conjunction with the FPC’s Karri Forest Management Plan (KFMP) (FPC, 2018). 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 also 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, 2013). 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 (FSC Australia, 2013). The definitions and values listed for each of the potential HCVs include all those described in FSC Australia’s HCVs evaluation framework. However, 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 FSC Australia’s HCVs evaluation framework, biodiversity hotspots are covered in HCV 1, 2 and 3 sections. FSC Australia’s Directory of Information Sources, which supports FSC Australia’s 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 of the sources consulted to identify these. This was made available to stakeholders in 2013, and in addition 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 a first important step in ensuring that potential HCVs have been identified within the karri FMU. In addition, this HCV assessment describes how each step of the FSC Australia’s HCVs evaluation 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 FSC Australia’s HCVs evaluation 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.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 5 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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 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 taken into account 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. • 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.
1 Whilst 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.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 6 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
The following sections identify and assess each of the six HCVs that are listed within the HCVs evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2013). Each HCV has been assessed in accordance with the step by step assessment pathway outlined in the HCVs evaluation framework.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 7 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
High Conservation Value 1 – Species diversity Forest areas containing globally, nationally and regionally significant concentrations of biodiversity values (e.g. endemism, endangered species, refugia).
From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2013). Definition of ‘Significant concentrations of biodiversity values’: Areas of native forest containing one or more of the VALUES identified are deemed to meet the threshold for significant concentrations of biodiversity values. Definition of region: Large, geographically distinct areas of land with common characteristics such as geology, landform patterns, climate, ecological features and plant and animal communities as defined by IBRA (Interim Bio [sic]2- Regionalisation for Australia). Values • Areas that contain species that are rare, threatened or endangered, or contain centres of endemism. • Areas that contain species that are depleted or poorly reserved at the IBRA region scale. • Areas with mapped significant seasonal concentrations of species (e.g. migratory staging areas). • Areas of high species/communities diversity. • Refugia and mosaics.
Assessment pathway
‘Step 1: Consult the FSC Australia Directory of Information Sources to identify relevant datasets and prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 10)
The FSC Australia’s Directory of Information Sources was consulted to identify relevant datasets and to prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly.
The relevant datasets from this process have been interrogated, as well as additional datasets, as outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). Further data has also been consulted since 2013. In particular, the FPC reviewed information available on the South West Australia global biodiversity hotspot.
2 IBRA stands for Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 8 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Outcomes
The most significant elements of this HCV class in the Warren Bioregion are located outside the area of the FPC’s activities (such as the highest levels of endemism, and most critically endangered species, communities and refugia).
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. Within this 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.
Birdlife Australia has identified significant areas in Western Australia for bird conservation including areas of value for Migratory species. None of these are present in the karri FMU.
HCV 1 is assessed as being present within the karri FMU due to: a) the presence of a number of threatened flora and fauna species; b) there being a high level of endemism within and adjacent to the karri FMU; c) the presence of priority ecological communities within the karri FMU; and d) due to the karri FMU being part of a global biodiversity hotspot.
a) There is a number of threatened flora and fauna species present in the karri FMU Threatened species are those assessed as being under risk of extinction. Therefore, these are also considered relevant to ‘species that are depleted or poorly reserved at the IBRA region scale’.
(i) Threatened fauna
In Western Australia, the Wildlife Conservation Act 19503 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.
A current list of threatened fauna can be found on the Parks and Wildlife Service’s website. Of these species, Table 1 lists those that have been identified to be present in the karri FMU and their respective probability of occurrence within the karri FMU. Links to the available Recovery Plans are also provided in Table 1.
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, 2017a):
3 Note that once new Biodiversity Conservation Regulations are finalised, the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 will be replaced by the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 9 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• CR: Critically Endangered – considered to be facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild.
• EN: Endangered – considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild.
• VU: Vulnerable – considered to be facing a high risk of extinction in the wild.
• IA: 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: 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 fauna - fauna otherwise in need of special protection to ensure their conservation.
In addition to threatened fauna species, ‘priority’ fauna has also been listed. Priority species are ranked in order of priority for evaluation of conservation status with priority 1 fauna (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, 2017a). Priority 4 species are ‘…adequately known, are rare but not threatened, or meet criteria for near threatened, or that have been recently removed from the threatened species or other specially protected fauna lists for [reasons] other than taxonomic reasons’ (Parks and Wildlife, 2017a). Priority 4 species may or could be threatened or in need of special protection if present circumstances change, and must be monitored regularly. Priority categories are defined in the document titled Conservation Codes for Western Australian Flora and Fauna.
The list of fauna in Table 1 also includes a probability of occurrence ranking, with 1 being the highest and 3 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 habitat.
2) Likely to occur in the area, extensive or sufficient suitable habitat within the area, 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.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 10 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Table 1: List of threatened and priority fauna present in the karri FMU*
* This list was last updated in February 2018 following the release of the threatened fauna notice in January 2018.
Probability Scientific Name Common Name Ranking of Recovery Plan* occurrence
Birds
Atrichornis Noisy Scrub Bird EN 3 Available clamosus
Botaurus Australasian EN 1 --- poiciloptilus Bittern
Cacatua pastinator Conservation Muir’s Corella 3 Available pastinator Dependent
Forest Red- Calyptorhynchus tailed Black VU 1 Available banksii naso Cockatoo
Calyptorhynchus Baudin’s EN 1 Available baudinii Cockatoo
Calyptorhynchus Carnaby’s EN 1 Available latirostris Cockatoo
Other specially Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon 2 --- protected fauna
Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl VU 3 Available
lxobrychus minutus Little Bittern P4 3 --- dubius
Black Bittern Ixobrychus (South West P2 3 --- flavicollis australis subpopulation)
Migratory bird protected Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis under an 3 international agreement.
Ninox connivens Barking Owl P3 2 --- connivens
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 11 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Probability Scientific Name Common Name Ranking of Recovery Plan* occurrence
Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck P4 2 ---
Tyto novaehollandiae Masked owl P3 2 --- novaehollandiae
Fish
Mud Minnow/ Galaxiella munda VU 1 --- Western Dwarf Galaxias Black-striped Galaxiella Minnow/ Black- EN 1 --- nigrostriata striped Dwarf Galaxias Pouched Geotria australis P1 1 --- Lamprey
Nannatherina Balston’s Pygmy VU 1 --- balstoni Perch
Lepidogalaxias Salamander Fish EN 3 --- salamandroides
Invertebrates
Western Pygmy Bertmainius opimus P3 1 --- Trapdoor Spider
Water Flea (Karri Daphnia forests) P1 3 --- occidentalis
Carter’s Westralunio carteri Freshwater VU 2 --- Mussel
Calamoecia Copepod P3 1 --- elongata (Northcliffe)
Non-marine Fibulacamptus Harpacticoid P2 3 --- bisetosus copepod (Muirillup Rock)
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 12 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Mammals
Bettongia Woylie CR 1 Available penicillata ogilbyi
Dasyurus geoffroii Chuditch VU 1 Available
Falsistrellus Western False P4 1 --- mackenziei Pipistrelle
Hydromys Water Rat P4 1 --- chrysogaster
Quenda, Isoodon obesulus Southern Brown P4 1 --- fusciventer Bandicoot
Notamacropus Tammar Wallaby P4 3 --- eugenii derbianus
Western Brush Notamacropus irma P4 1 --- Wallaby
Myrmecobius Numbat EN 3 Available fasciatus
Phascogale South-western Conservation tapoatafa Brush-tailed 1 --- Dependent wambenger Phascogale
Pseudocheirus Western Ringtail CR 1 Available occidentalis Possum
Setonix brachyurus Quokka VU 1 Available
Reptiles
Elapognathus Short-nosed P2 3 --- minor Snake
*Recovery plans are developed in accordance with Policy 35 Conserving Threatened Species and Communities (Parks and Wildlife, 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.
(ii) 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. Links to the available Recovery Plans are also provided in Table 2.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 13 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Table 2: List of threatened flora present in the karri FMU*
* This list was last reviewed in February 2018 following the release of the threatened flora notice in January 2018.
Recovery Common name Ranking Scientific name Plan*
Harrington’s Spider Caladenia harringtoniae VU --- Orchid
Majestic Spider Orchid EN Caladenia winfieldii Available
Northcliffe Kennedia VU Kennedia glabrata ---
Reedia EN Reedia spathacea ---
*Recovery plans are developed in accordance with Policy 35 Conserving Threatened Species and Communities (Parks and Wildife, 2015) b) There is a high level of endemism within and adjacent to the karri FMU Slatyer et al. (2007) identified 11 main centres of anuran endemism on the Australian continent ‘…the most important being the Wet Tropics and the south-west near Bunbury- Augusta and near Walpole’ (p. 583). These findings are consistent with other research on endemism including that by Crisp et al. (2001). While the highest levels of endemism in the South West are outside the karri FMU they are still significant on a national level and are therefore assessed as being a HCV that requires consideration in managing timber harvesting operations within the karri FMU. c) There are priority ecological communities within the karri FMU An ecological community can be listed as threatened by the Minister for Environment.
Although there are no declared threatened ecological communities in the karri FMU, there are some priority ecological communities present, of which some are within informal reserves in the karri FMU and are excluded from harvesting. However, ‘Epiphytic Cryptogams of the karri forest’ can occur beyond informal reserves in older or unburnt regrowth karri stands. Prior to disturbance activities, a check for the presence of threatened and priority ecological communities is undertaken. If any are identified within or in proximity to the harvest areas, the FPC requests review by the Parks and Wildlife Service, whom will undertake ground truthing to ensure these areas are adequately protected from disturbance operations. d) The karri FMU is part of a global biodiversity hotspot
For an area to qualify as a global biodiversity hotspot it must meet two main criteria (Conservation International, n.d.): 1) it has at least 1 500 endemic vascular plants; and 2) it has 30 per cent or less of its original natural vegetation. The karri forest contains approximately 82 per cent of its original extent (prior to European settlement) (Conservation Commission, 2013, Bradshaw, 2015). In addition, as at June 2016 there is currently one
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 14 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
known endemic vascular plant species in the karri FMU, which is Leucopogon rufus (Parks and Wildlife, 2007).
The South West Australian biodiversity hotspot as declared by Conservation International is represented in Figure 1. Figure 1, shows the location of the hotspot in relation to the karri FMU. The global hotspot area covers a vast expanse, which covers over 350 000 square kilometres (Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, n.d.), which includes urban population centres such as the Perth metropolitan area. The main threats to the biodiversity hotspot are land clearing, salinity, feral animals and Phytophthora cinnamomi (Commonwealth of Australia, n.d.).
‘Step 2: Seek expert advice on basis of Step 1 to further identify HCVs including habitat requirements and range mapping’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 10).
Expert advice has been provided by the Parks and Wildlife Service 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 ‘taken4’.
• Developing and reviewing periodically the Forest Fauna Distribution Information System (FDIS) 5 (Christensen et al., 2005). The system combines the vegetation 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, which will be:
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.
‘Step 3: Undertake targeted flora and fauna surveys to determine presence or absence/range etc of site specific HCVs’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 10)
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
4 ‘To take’ in the context of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950.
5 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.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 15 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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 to ensuring the protection of threatened and priority fauna. FDIS is checked during completion of the pre- operations checklist, 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 how FDIS was developed and what its purpose is.
Excerpt of the FDIS manual (Christensen et al., 2005) 6:
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
6 This extract has been taken from the Executive summary (p. 6-7) and Timber harvesting (p. 21-22).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 16 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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;
• 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.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 17 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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, 2018). 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. In addition, it may also help identify presence of predator species. These surveys will provide further guidance to ensure appropriate management strategies are implemented. Further information about the implementation of the surveys, including training for staff and monitoring of performance of the fauna monitoring program, is available on the FPC’s website.
‘Step 4: Consult with stakeholders on documentation prepared under Step 1, 2 and 3’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 10)
There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2018), this HCV assessment, and the associated Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). Further, threatened wildlife listings are reviewed annually and changes can be recommended by the Western Australian Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC). In addition, the public is invited to submit nominations to add taxa to, or delete taxa from, the current Declared Rare Flora and Specially Protected Fauna lists as described on Parks and Wildlife Service’s website.
Further, the FPC has consulted with the Parks and Wildlife Service to implement targeted fauna surveys and consulted with a range of other stakeholders to refine our approach to fauna monitoring.
Management strategies for HCV1
The ‘Biological diversity’ section of the KFMP (FPC, 2018) outlines the reserve system throughout the FMP 2014 which has been designed and implemented to manage risks to HCV 1.
In addition, the FPC applies a comprehensive range of measures to preserve HCV 1 within the karri FMU. The measures employed will also help to ensure management activities do not threaten the South West Australia biodiversity hotspot. These include, but are not limited to:
• A FDIS report is requested from the Parks and Wildlife Service during completion of the pre-operations checklist (FEM019 Planning checklist for disturbance activities) when planning operations including road construction and harvesting (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• The FEM019 checklist must be approved by 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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 18 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Service’s instructions to ensure the protection of those species identified (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• Prior to carrying out any activity likely to result in permanent disturbance (e.g. road construction) a rare flora survey is to be carried out by a Parks and Wildlife Service approved botanist. Where rare flora is found, management actions are specified by the Parks and Wildlife Service (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• Implementation of operations undertaken by the FPC need to be consistent with Parks and Wildlife Service’s Policy 35 Conserving Threatened Species and Communities Policy 7 (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• 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 FEM019 Planning checklist for disturbance activities 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)
• 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 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 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.
7 Policy 9 Conservation of Endangered Flora in the Wild has been replaced with Policy 35 Conserving Threatened Species and Communities Policy.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 19 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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 evaluation framework. In addition to the requirements in the documents referred to above, 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).
• The FPC will undertake pre-harvest fauna monitoring in the karri forest in accordance with its Procedure 46 Targeted fauna surveys within pure and mixed karri forest (FPC, 2018) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 20 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Figure 1: South West Australia global biodiversity hotspot and the karri Forest Management Unit
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 21 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
High Conservation Value 2 – Landscape-level ecosystems and mosaics
Forest areas containing regionally significant large landscape level forests, contained within, or containing the management unit, where viable populations of most if not all naturally-occurring species exist in natural patterns of distribution and abundance.
From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2013). Definition of ‘Large landscape-level 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 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. Definition of ‘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. Values Areas with this HCV include: • Landscape-scale native forests that have experienced lesser levels of past human disturbance (e.g., minimal timber harvesting) or other management (e.g. fire suppression), or areas within such forests.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 22 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• Native forests that are rare at the regional or finer scale because they contain forest communities with successional stages, forest structures, and species composition that are similar in distribution and abundance to native forests that have been only subject to natural disturbance processes or minimal human intervention. This would also include areas within such forests. While these forests may not contain old growth, they would typically contain an abundance of older forest attributes (biologically mature or late successional) characteristic of the forest type, as indicated by tree species composition, tree size, or other attributes applicable to the forest community type, such as coarse woody debris, snags, herb diversity, structural understorey diversity, and the lack of invasive plant species. • Forests recognised as being regionally significant at the bioregion or larger scale by conservation organisations (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. • Forests that provide regionally significant habitat connectivity between larger forest areas or between refugia and mosaics. • Roadless areas. • Forests that haven’t been affected by forest management activities.
Assessment pathway
‘Step 1: Interrogation of the Directory of Information Sources and databases to enable mapping and reporting on vegetation communities, condition assessment, wilderness assessment, concentrations of species, old-growth, wilderness, growth stage, vegetation condition and remnant vegetation, logging history etc and to determine whether further mapping needs to be commissioned’ (FSC Australia, 2013 p. 12)
The FSC Australia’s Directory of Information Sources and associated 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.
The relevant datasets from this process have been interrogated, as well as additional datasets, as outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013).
‘Step 2: Independent third party reviews: World Heritage Reports, values threat analysis; scientific reports of landscape scale impacts, comparative study of historical and current aerial photographs’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 13)
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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 23 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
of Western Australia, 1999), included processes for stakeholder consultation to identify values at the regional scale.
‘Step 3: Stakeholder consultation on the outcomes of Steps 1 and 2’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 13)
There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of the FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2018), 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 (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 the FMP 2014.
Outcomes
The FPC considers that the entire karri FMU is of significant landscape level value and therefore qualifies as being considered HCV 2. In addition, the karri FMU is part of a global biodiversity hotspot, as listed by Conservation International. For more information on the global biodiversity hotspot see HCV 1 section.
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. In addition, approximately 66 per cent of the 173 960 hectares of the State’s karri forest is within the reserve system. The forests in the reserve system have been less affected by forest management activity and they all contain areas of undisturbed forest.
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 in the karri FMU is protected through a number of means including through the allocation of informal reserve systems in the karri FMU. These occupy an area of approximately 48 310 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 the South West Australia biodiversity hotspot.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 24 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Management strategies for HCV 2
The FPC applies a comprehensive range of management strategies to preserve this HCV within the karri FMU. These strategies seek to carefully manage the scale and intensity of disturbance to levels that maintain structural diversity of the forest and to rapidly regenerate the forest. The strategies 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 in karri forest is limited to a maximum coupe size of 40 hectares in mature and two-tiered forest, and a maximum coupe size of 20 hectares in regrowth forest 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).
• 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, 2016) 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).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 25 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• 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).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 26 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
High Conservation Value 3 – Ecosystems and habitats
Forest areas that are in or contain rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems. Ecosystems that are rare and/or threatened at a global, national or regional level (as per FSC-US Forest Management Standard v1.0). From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2013).
Distinctiveness in terms of size, quality (particularly lack of human disturbance), or location within the ecosystem’s geographic range may be considered in assessing ecosystem rarity.
Values
Areas with this HCV may include:
• Extant rainforests
• Areas for conservation of important genes or genetically distinct populations
• Ecosystems that are depleted or poorly reserved at the IBRA bioregion scale
• Old-growth forests
• Remnant vegetation in heavily cleared landscapes
Definition of old-growth:
Old-growth forest is ecologically mature forest where the effects of disturbances are now negligible.
Old-growth and late successional stands and forests include:
• Type 1 old-growth – stands that have never been logged and that display late successional/old-growth characteristics.
• Type 2 old-growth – stands that have been logged, but which retain significant late-successional/old-growth structure and functions.
Assessment pathway
Step 1: Interrogation of ecosystem databases and range mapping. Use when ecosystems/seral stages etc have been well described/mapped’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 13)
The FSC Australia’s Directory of Information Sources was consulted to identify relevant datasets and to prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly. The relevant datasets from this process have been interrogated, as well as additional datasets, as outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). In addition, the karri FMU is part of global
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 27 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
biodiversity hotspot. Information on this is available in HCV 1 section of this HCV assessment.
Type 1 old-growth forest
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 Forest Policy Statement 1992 and the criteria developed by JANIS8 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.
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 Type 1 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.
8 Joint ANZECC/MCFFA National Forest Policy Statement Implementation Sub-committee (1997).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 28 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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 has 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).
Step 2: Where there is no ecosystem mapping undertake ecosystem/seral stage mapping’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 13)
Aside from ecosystem and seral stage mapping as part of the South West Western Australian RFA process, coupe level seral stage mapping has been undertaken as part of the harvest coupe planning process. In particular, this mapping has helped ensure the identification of Type 2 old-growth forest. This additional mapping was considered appropriate as previous mapping was of lower resolution.
‘Step 3: Consult with stakeholders on the outcomes from Step 1 and 2’ (FSC Australia, p. 13)
There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2018), 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.
Step 3 is further divided into the following headings of: a) areas for conservation of important genes or genetically distinct populations; and b) old-growth forests. This provides some more specific information about the stakeholder consultation undertaken in relation to these values.
a) Areas for conservation of important genes or genetically distinct populations Important genes or genetically distinct populations are protected via identification and measures that are outlined in the HCV 1 section of this HCV assessment, which includes stakeholder consultation.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 29 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
For example, threatened wildlife listings are reviewed annually and changes can be recommended by the Western Australian Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC). The public is invited to submit nominations to add taxa to, or delete taxa from, the current Declared Rare Flora and Specially Protected Fauna lists as described on the Parks and Wildlife Service’s website.
b) 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.
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 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 6.39, 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. Consultation on Type 2 old-growth identification and 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.
Outcomes
Outcomes are divided into the following headings of: a) areas for conservation of important genes or genetically distinct populations; b) ecosystems that are depleted or poorly reserved at the IBRA bioregion scale; and c) old-growth forests.
a) Areas for conservation of important genes or genetically distinct populations As outlined in the HCV 1 section of this KFMP, threatened flora, fauna and ecological communities are declared by the Minister for Environment. These are declared threatened if they are considered likely to become extinct, are rare or are in need of special protection.
9 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’.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 30 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
The assignment of priority status to flora, fauna or ecological communities may be because they could be threatened, near threatened, and/or lack good survey information and therefore do not qualify for listing as threatened.
The HCV 1 section of this HCV assessment states that there are some priority ecological communities within the karri FMU. Also, in areas within and around the karri FMU there is a high level of endemism. In particular, the endangered Majestic Spider Orchid (Caladenia winfieldii) is within the karri FMU and this species is endemic to the South West of Western Australia.
Measures are in place to protect the priority ecological communities within the karri FMU, as well as threatened and priority flora and fauna, which in turn is important for ensuring the conservation of genetically distinct populations.
b) Ecosystems that are depleted or poorly reserved at the IBRA bioregion scale Within the karri FMU all ecosystems 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. Informal reserves in the karri FMU include poorly reserved vegetation complexes, and the poorly reserved Darling Scarp forest ecosystem.
c) Old-growth forests This HCV was assessed to exist within the karri FMU due to the presence of 13 130 hectares of Type 1 old-growth forest (all of which is excluded from disturbance activities), 6 550 hectares is karri old-growth forest. An additional 84 hectares of Type 2 old-growth forest has been identified within the production forest and has been placed 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.
Management strategies for HCV3
The FPC applies a comprehensive range of management strategies to preserve this HCV within the karri FMU including but not limited to:
• 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 have been placed in temporary protection areas by the FPC. The total area of old-growth forest is shown 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).
• The previous Conservation and Parks Commission public nomination process for old- growth forest was developed following extensive public consultation (refer to the Conservation and Park’s Commission’s Assessment criteria and process for the Conservation Commission review of old-growth amendments – Consultation Paper).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 31 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• 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.10
• 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 April 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, 2018). 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, 2018), is available on the FPC’s website.
• The pre-operations checklist (FEM019 Planning checklist for disturbance activities) (DBCA, 2017a), 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).
• An FDIS report is requested from the Parks and Wildlife Service during completion of the pre-operations checklist (FEM 019 Planning checklist for disturbance activities) (DBCA, 2017a) when planning operations such as road construction and maintenance and harvesting (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• The FPC’s targeted pre-harvest fauna surveys are conducted as part of pre-harvest planning and commenced in 2015. The surveys aim to validate and/or improve FDIS, provide additional information about potential habitat that is being utilised by threatened and priority fauna, and contribute to survey data collected on each of these species. Survey results are provided to the Parks and Wildlife Service to
10 The Parks and Wildlife Service process for identifying and determining areas of old-growth forest does not include the additional requirements of ‘Type 2 old-growth forest’.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 32 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
provide advice on recommended management strategies (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• Prior to carrying out any activity likely to result in permanent or semi-permanent disturbance (e.g. road construction and maintenance, construction of a log landing); a rare flora survey is to be carried out by a Parks and Wildlife Service approved botanist (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• Implementation of Parks and Wildlife Service recommended management strategies occurs for identified sensitive species (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• Implementation of predator control pre and post harvesting (Responsibility: Parks and Wildlife Service’s SFM Co-ordinator in the relevant region).
• Habitat elements such as potential habitat trees are retained during harvesting operations as per the Silviculture Guideline for Karri Forest (Parks and Wildlife, 2014a) (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management).
• Use of fauna habitat zones (refer to Guidelines for the Selection of Fauna Habitat Zones) (Parks and Wildlife, 2017b) (Responsibility: Parks and Wildlife Service Forest Management Branch).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 33 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 34 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 35 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
High Conservation Value 4 – Critical ecosystem services Forest areas that provide basic services of nature in critical situations (e.g. watershed protection, erosion control).
From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2013). HCV 4 is focused on basic ecosystem services in critical situations. Substantial alteration of these forests is likely to result in an unacceptable impact on the delivery of ecosystem services. These services include: consolidation of highly erodible soils including on steep slopes, forests that protect against flooding or forests that provide barriers to fire. Guidance on ‘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 socio-economic values. (Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0 D4-9 p115) Guidance on ‘critical situation’ thresholds FSC Australia cannot provide clear thresholds on when an area provides critical protection. An operable question to help address this question may be, “What is the impact of removing the forest cover?” Guidance on ‘critical situations’ – watershed protection: A forest that is part of a local drinking water catchment, irrigation supply system, or is a critical source for a remote location (i.e., water is pumped to a remote location) may be considered a ‘critical situation, particularly when people are dependent on the guarantee of water, where the regulation of water flow guarantees the existence of fishing grounds or agricultural land or protects downstream communities from flooding. Forests which provide critical protection of water supplies for rare, threatened, or endangered aquatic species and/or ecosystems are also ‘critical situations’. Values: forests which provide: • protection from flooding • protection from erosion • barriers from destructive fire • clean water catchments Critical situations encompass: • Areas with highly erodible soil • Areas with steep slopes • Clean water and/or irrigation supply systems • Areas which protect against flooding • Vulnerable areas which support rare or endangered ecosystem functions.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 36 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Assessment pathway
‘Step 1: Identification and mapping of HC Value areas’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 15)
The FSC Australia’s Directory of Information Sources was consulted to identify relevant datasets and to prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly.
The relevant datasets from this process have been interrogated, as well as additional datasets, as outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013).
‘Step 2: Site specific and catchment level management hydrological modelling, monitoring and reporting’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 15)
The site specific and catchment level management hydrological modelling, monitoring and reporting was identified and referenced as per the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013).
‘Step 3: Consultation with stakeholders on outcomes of Steps 1 and 2’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 15)
There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2018), this HCV assessment, and the associated Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). In addition, stakeholders including the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation and the Parks and Wildlife Service have been consulted.
Outcomes
This HCV is considered to be 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 4 349 people.
In addition to its importance in ensuring clean drinking water is available to local communities, there are known populations of threatened and priority aquatic species present in the karri FMU. In particular, Pouched Lamprey (Geotria australis, P1), Black-striped minnow/ Black-striped Dwarf Galaxias (Galaxiella nigrostriata, EN), Balston’s Pygmy Perch (Nannatherina balstoni, VU), Salamander Fish (Lepidogalaxias salamandroides, EN) and the Mud Minnow/ Western Dwarf Galaxias (Galaxiella munda, VU) are known to occur within and adjacent to the karri FMU. It is therefore considered appropriate that the management of forests, which may affect water quality, is relevant to their protection.
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 140 hectares.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 37 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• 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 21 520 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 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.
Management strategies for HCV 4
The FPC applies a comprehensive range of management strategies to preserve this HCV within the karri FMU 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)
o risk assessments are conducted for soil damage and erosion as well as waterlogging and the contamination of water courses.
o 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.
o rehabilitation occurs if soil damage is assessed as being excessive. • Clearfelling in karri forest is limited to a maximum coupe size of 40 hectares in mature and two-tiered forest and a maximum coupe size of 20 hectares in regrowth forest 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)
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 38 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• 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).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 39 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Figure 3-A: Water catchments and public drinking water source areas in the karri Forest Management Unit
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 40 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Figure 3-B: Water catchments and public drinking water source areas in the karri Forest Management Unit
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 41 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
High Conservation Value 5 – Community needs Forest areas fundamental to meeting basic needs of local communities (e.g. subsistence, health).
From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2013). Definition of ‘basic human needs’: Local people use the area to obtain resources on which they are critically dependent. This may be the case if local people harvest food products from the forest, or collect building materials or medicinal plants. “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 (e.g., wind) and traditional farming practices”. Forest uses such as recreational hunting or commercial timber harvesting (i.e., that is not critical for local building materials) are not basic human needs. Definition of ‘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. Affected vs. Interested parties: In the definition of basic needs, priority is given to potentially affected parties e.g. local community and neighbours. The FM operation shall implement a communications and stakeholder participation plan regarding affected parties. There is also the need to set up a dispute resolution mechanism if conflicts or disputes are present. Interested parties e.g. NGOs, government organisations shall be considered during the stakeholder consultation process in order to collect information about the values associated to the forest area. (Interested party: Any person or group concerned with or directly affected by a standard. ISEAL Code of Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards v 5.0) However, if affected stakeholders agree that their basic needs are met but interested stakeholders do not, the matter is considered to be agreed for the purpose of meeting this HCV class. Values: • Unique/main sources of water for drinking and other daily uses. • Unique/main sources of water for the irrigation of food crops. • Food, medicines or fuel etc. for local consumption.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 42 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Assessment pathway
‘Step 1: Identification and mapping of HCV areas’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 16)
The FSC Australia Directory of Information Sources was consulted to identify relevant datasets and to prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly.
The relevant datasets from this process have been interrogated, as well as additional datasets, as outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013).
‘Step 2: Identification and consultation with stakeholders’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 16)
There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2018), this HCV assessment, and the associated Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). This included consultation with stakeholders who utilise the forest resource.
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. The FMU is indirectly a source of water for the towns of Manjimup and Pemberton, but this aspect is covered in the HCV 4 section.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 43 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
High Conservation Value 6 – Cultural values Forest areas critical to local communities’ traditional cultural identity (areas of cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance identified in cooperation with such local communities).
From the High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework (FSC Australia, 2013). Definition of ‘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. Definition of ‘cultural identity’: Certain communities are so closely bound to some areas that it is highly likely that these are critical to their traditional cultural identity and heritage. Cultural identity is dynamic and is not just tied to traditions that occurred hundreds or thousands of years ago. In some cases, as in Australia where Indigenous people were dispossessed from their lands by colonisation, knowledge about traditional places may have been lost for several generations, but has been revived in a way that suits the modern context. Significant places may not just relate to ‘traditional’ identity, but to how people see themselves today, which is a combination of traditions and intercultural history (for settler societies) and modernity. Notes: While the focus on ‘traditional cultural identity’ highlights the importance of traditional owners and areas critical to their cultural identity, HCV 6 also recognises places critical to non- Indigenous culture and heritage. Examples: Areas may include religious/sacred sites, burial grounds or sites at which regular traditional ceremonies take place. They may also include outstanding natural landscapes that have evolved as a result of social, economic, administrative, and/or religious imperative (i.e., fossils, artefacts, areas representing a traditional way of life). They may also include areas that by virtue of their natural properties possess significant religious, artistic, aesthetic or cultural association (such as traditional hunting/gathering) that have been used/recognised over the years. Values: • Aesthetic values • Historic values • Scientific values • Social (including economic) values • Spiritual values
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 44 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Assessment pathway ‘Step 1: use of maps and registered sites (not always accurate), Historical accounts and local knowledge (evidence of consultation required), consult historical and Aboriginal Inventories (national, state and local level) identified in the Directory of Information Sources’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 17)
The FSC Australia’s Directory of Information Sources was consulted to identify relevant datasets and to prepare lists and maps of potential HCV accordingly. Historical and Aboriginal inventories at the national, state and local levels were consulted. This includes historical accounts and local knowledge.
The relevant datasets from this process have been interrogated, as well as additional datasets, as outlined in the Data audit and gap analysis report (FPC, 2013).
‘Step 2: stakeholder consultation on the outcomes from Step 1’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 17)
There has been stakeholder consultation undertaken on multiple versions of FPC’s KFMP (FPC, 2018), this HCV assessment, and the associated Data audit and gap analysis (FPC, 2013). Stakeholder consultation has also been undertaken in relation to 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 State of Western Australia, 1999), as well as during the development of the FMP 2014.
‘Step 3: Field survey and expert report, Cultural Heritage Agreements with local groups covering all or some of the above points’ (FSC Australia, 2013, p. 17)
A field survey and expert report will be required if there is not substantial acceptance of the results obtained through Steps 1 and 2.
Outcomes
This section has been divided into four headings: 1) Noongar heritage; 2) non-Aboriginal cultural heritage; 3) scientific values; and 4) aesthetic and social values.
1. Noongar heritage The initial 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. Table 3 and Figures 4-A and 4-B are made available to the public. However, 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’).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 45 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Table 3: List of Noongar and other heritage sites in the karri FMU and surrounding environment*
*This list was last updated in February 2018.
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 Registered Quarry, site Archaeological deposit
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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 46 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Site Site name Status Site type Access Easting Northing
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
5779 Manjimup Lodged Artefacts/Scatter Open 422639 6210647
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 Open 447153 6194695 Deposit, Named Place, Natural Feature, Water Source
Due to the presence of the registered sites listed in Table 3 this HCV is assessed to exist in the karri FMU.
In addition, 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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 47 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
FPC’s document Statement of Commitment: Engagement with Noongar Peoples in the South West of Western Australia (FPC, 2015).
Noongar peoples 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.
2. 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.
3. Scientific values There are areas of scientific value considered to be present in the karri FMU. 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. The areas of scientific value include long-term silvicultural trials.
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.
4. Aesthetic and social values A variety of aesthetic and social values are considered to be present within the karri FMU. This includes, but is not limited to, the visual amenity of the forest, clean air and water, and recreation within the forest.
As part of pre-harvest planning a range of social and aesthetic values are identified including:
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 48 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• 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 a number of other uses in the area, such as for recreational activities and events.
In addition, during pre-harvest planning it is noted if proposed harvest operations are going to be conducted adjacent to major roads, travel routes, recreational tracks, private property, towns or settlements. If such conditions exist, measures are taken to conserve visual values.
Management Strategies for HCV6
The FPC applies a comprehensive range of management strategies to preserve this HCV within the karri FMU including but not limited to:
• Searches of relevant databases, such as the Department of Aboriginal Affairs 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 Production, Manager Forest Management and Community Consultation Officer).
• 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 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 FPC’s operations that potentially impact on native title or cultural interests (Responsibility: Manager Forest Management, Manager Production and Community Consultation Officer).
• 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).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 49 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
• 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 Identifying and protecting native title rights as well as Noongar and non-Aboriginal heritage sites in the South West forest region (FPC, 2018) (Responsibility: Manager Production, Manager Forest Management and Community Consultation Officer).
• 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).
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 50 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Figure 4-A: Noongar and other heritage sites in the karri Forest Management Unit (and within 1km)
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 51 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Figure 4-B: Noongar and other heritage sites in the karri Forest Management Unit (and within 1km)
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 52 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
References
(Conservation Commission) Conservation Commission of Western Australia 2013. 'Forest Management Plan 2014-2023', Perth, Australia. (DBCA) Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions 2017a. ‘Planning checklist for disturbance activities. Form FEM019', 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.
(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.
--- 2016. ‘Policy 9 Forest management’, Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.
--- 2018. 'Identification, assessment, and demarcation of Type 2 old-growth karri forest. Procedure 47', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia
--- 2018. 'Identifying and protecting native title rights as well as Noongar and non-Aboriginal heritage sites in the South West forest region. Procedure 44', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.
.--- 2018. 'Karri forest management plan', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.
--- 2018. 'Targeted fauna surveys within pure and mixed karri forest. Procedure 46', Forest Products Commission, Perth, Australia.
(FSC Australia) Forest Stewardship Council Australia 2013. 'High Conservation Values (HCVs) evaluation framework', FSC Australia, Melbourne, Australia. (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.
(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].
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 53 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
--- 2014. ‘Karri treemarking ready reckoner. Field Guide FEM039’, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, Australia.
--- 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 Parks and Wildlife, 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.
--- 2017a. 'Conservation Codes for Western Australian Flora and Fauna', 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.
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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 54 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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 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.
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].
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 55 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
Appendix 1 – Shortened forms
DEC Department of Environment and Conservation (in 2013 this Department was split into the Department of Parks and Wildlife and the Department of Environmental Regulation, then in 2017 the Department of Parks and Wildlife became Parks and Wildlife Services within the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions).
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
NSHAs Noongar Standard Heritage Agreements
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 56 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 57 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed
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 - 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 - Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 - Wildlife Conservation Regulations 1970
Commonwealth legislation
- Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 - Native Title Act 1993
Karri forest HCV assessment Page 58 of 58 Version control: V02/June 2018 Authority: Director Forest Operations Responsible Officer: Senior Coordinator Forest Management Systems Security classification: Public Uncontrolled when printed