DOCSLIB.ORG

Preliminary Systems Inventory and Project Scoping River Murray Catchment Goyder Institute for Water Research Technical Report Se

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Preliminary systems inventory and project scoping River Murray Catchment Goyder Institute for Water Research Technical Report Series No. 13/9 www.goyderinstitute.org Goyder Institute for Water Research Technical Report Series ISSN: 1839–2725 The Goyder Institute for Water Research is a partnership between the South Australian Government through the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, CSIRO, Flinders University, the University of Adelaide and the University of South Australia. The Institute will enhance the South Australian Government’s capacity to develop and deliver science–based policy solutions in water management. It brings together the best scientists and researchers across Australia to provide expert and independent scientific advice to inform good government water policy and identify future threats and opportunities to water security. The following Associate organisations contributed to this report: Enquires should be addressed to: Goyder Institute for Water Research Level 1, Torrens Building 220 Victoria Square, Adelaide, SA, 5000 tel: 08–8303 8952 e–mail: [email protected] Citation Kirby M, Bice C, Doody TM, Hemming S, Holland KL, Jolly ID, Mason K, McGinness H, Muller KL, Nicol JM, Pollino CA, Rigney D, Wallace TA, Ye Q. 2013. Preliminary Systems Inventory and Project Scoping River Murray Catchment, Goyder Institute for Water Research Technical Report Series No. 13/9 Copyright © 2013 CSIRO, SARDI, University of Adelaide and Flinders University of South Australia. To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO, SARDI, University of Adelaide and Flinders University of South Australia. Disclaimer The Participants advise that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on scientific research and does not warrant or represent the completeness of any information or material in this publication. Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 2. The Murray–Darling Basin ............................................................................................ 3 2.1. River flows ............................................................................................................... 3 2.2. River salinity ............................................................................................................ 6 2.3. River modelling ........................................................................................................ 8 2.4. Murray–Darling Basin Plan .................................................................................... 10 3. The floodplain – river ecological communities .......................................................... 14 3.1. Floodplain overstorey vegetation ......................................................................... 15 3.2. Aquatic and floodplain understorey vegetation ................................................... 20 3.3. Birds and mammals ............................................................................................... 32 3.4. Frogs ...................................................................................................................... 34 3.5. Fish ......................................................................................................................... 37 3.6. Micro‐ and macro‐invertebrates ........................................................................... 41 3.7. Carbon and nutrients ............................................................................................. 44 3.8. Algal blooms .......................................................................................................... 50 3.9. Biofilms .................................................................................................................. 56 3.10. Drought and salinity .............................................................................................. 59 4. Indigenous flows and environmental flows ............................................................... 61 4.1. The political and historical contexts ...................................................................... 61 4.2. Indigenous ‘water’ in the Murray–Darling Basin ................................................... 62 4.3. Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 64 5. Predictive ecology ...................................................................................................... 65 5.1. Frameworks and Assessment Methods for Environmental Flows ........................ 65 5.2. Hydrological Alteration (Environmental Water Requirements) ............................ 65 5.3. Habitat Suitability models ..................................................................................... 69 5.4. Environmental models for decision–making purposes ......................................... 71 6. Options for developing an environmental flow tool ................................................. 77 6.1. Management objectives and ecological targets .................................................... 77 7. Knowledge gaps ......................................................................................................... 82 7.1. Vegetation ............................................................................................................. 82 7.2. Birds and mammals ............................................................................................... 83 Preliminary systems inventory for the River Murray i 7.3. Fish ......................................................................................................................... 84 7.4. Macro– and micro–invertebrates .......................................................................... 85 7.5. Carbon, nutrients, algal blooms and biofilms ........................................................ 85 7.6. Indigenous flows .................................................................................................... 87 7.7. Predictive ecology ................................................................................................. 87 8. References ................................................................................................................. 89 Appendix 1. Workshop report ................................................................................................. 126 Appendix 2. EWRs for South Australia .................................................................................... 131 Appendix 3. Understory plant species list for the South Australian River Murray Corridor ... 133 Preliminary systems inventory for the River Murray ii 1. Introduction We report here the findings of the Goyder Institute Project E.1.5 “ Preliminary systems inventory and project scoping River Murray Catchment”. The project was commissioned by the Goyder Institute as a key part of its River Murray Programme1. The purpose of this project was to scope out potential follow–on project(s) by providing an inventory of knowledge and knowledge gaps, on: flows within the Murray–Darling Basin (MDB), the resulting flows into South Australia (SA), and how they are affected by climate change, SDLs, environmental flow management and other influences; constraints and opportunities presented by those flows for environmental and Indigenous flow management within South Australia; and relationships between the knowledge and knowledge gaps and SA departmental priorities for environmental and Indigenous flow management. Researchers in the project team each contributed expert knowledge of different aspects of environmental flows in the lower River Murray in South Australia. Knowledge areas included in this report were MDB hydrology, river flows, salinity and modelling (Mac Kirby, Ian Jolly, Kate Holland), Murray–Darling Basin Plan (Carmel Pollino), floodplain overstorey vegetation (Tanya Doody), aquatic and floodplain understorey (Jason Nicol), birds and mammals (Heather McGinness), frogs (Kerri Muller and Kate Mason), fish (Qifeng Ye and Chris Bice), micro‐ and macro‐invertebrates (Todd Wallace), carbon and nutrients (Todd Wallace), algal blooms (Todd Wallace), biofilms (Todd Wallace), drought and salinity (Todd Wallace), indigenous flows (Steve Hemming and Daryle Rigney), predictive ecology (Carmel Pollino) and options for developing an environmental flow tool (Todd Wallace). Potentially, several projects could be recommended as suitable for a follow‐on project; the Goyder Institute itself suggested ten potential projects when it commissioned the project. A key step in the project was to identify which was the highest priority (and why). This was done at a stakeholder workshop in early April 2012; the stakeholders included SA government departmental staff, catchment authority representatives and representatives from indigenous groups, as well as the research organizations of the project team, and the Goyder Institute. The stakeholder workshop, including participants and recommendations, is described in Appendix 1. The first workshop resulted in a reasonable consensus for a priority project on floodplain processes and their interaction with the river and terrestrial environment; importantly, the focus should be at the scale of the whole SA River Murray
Recommended publications
  • Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Proposed Kwinana to Australind Gas

    Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Proposed Kwinana to Australind Gas

    __________________________________________________________________________________ FLORA AND VEGETATION SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED KWINANA TO AUSTRALIND GAS PIPELINE INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR Prepared for: Bowman Bishaw Gorham and Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources Prepared by: Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd November 2003 MATTISKE CONSULTING PTY LTD DRD0301/039/03 __________________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. SUMMARY............................................................................................................................................... 1 2. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Location................................................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Climate .................................................................................................................................................. 2 2.3 Vegetation.............................................................................................................................................. 3 2.4 Declared Rare and Priority Flora......................................................................................................... 3 2.5 Local and Regional Significance........................................................................................................... 5 2.6 Threatened
  • ALINTA DBNGP LOOPING 10 Rehabilitation Management Plan

    ALINTA DBNGP LOOPING 10 Rehabilitation Management Plan

    DBNGP (WA) Nominees Pty Ltd DBNGP LOOPING 10 Rehabilitation Management Plan ALINTA DBNGP LOOPING 10 Rehabilitation Management Plan November 2005 Ecos Consulting (Aust) Pty Ltd CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1 2 REHABILITATION REVIEW............................................................ 1 2.1 REHABILITATION OBJECTIVES ............................................................... 2 3 EXISTING VEGETATION ................................................................. 2 3.1 FLORA AND VEGETATION...................................................................... 2 3.2 VEGETATION STUDIES ........................................................................... 4 3.2.1 Study Method ............................................................................... 4 3.2.2 Study Results ................................................................................ 7 3.3 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES ...................................................... 10 4 REHABILITATION STRATEGY..................................................... 11 5 REHABILITATION METHODS ..................................................... 11 5.1 WEED MANAGEMENT.......................................................................... 11 5.2 DIEBACK (PHYTOPHTHORA CINNAMOMI) MANAGEMENT .................... 11 5.3 PRIORITY AND RARE FLORA MANAGEMENT ........................................ 12 5.4 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ................................................................... 13 5.5
  • (Riverland Pipeline – Pl6) Environmental Impact

    (Riverland Pipeline – Pl6) Environmental Impact

    ANGASTON TO BERRI TRANSMISSION PIPELINE AND MURRAY BRIDGE LATERAL PIPELINE (RIVERLAND PIPELINE – PL6) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT December 2003 Riverland Natural Gas Tranmission Pipeline Environmental Impact Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................6 1.1 Background.................................................................................................................................6 1.2 Regulatory Framework..............................................................................................................6 1.3 Purpose of Document .................................................................................................................6 2.0 RIVERLAND PIPELINE SYSTEM .................................................................9 2.1 System Description .....................................................................................................................9 2.2 Operational Activities.................................................................................................................9 2.3 Design Specifications ................................................................................................................10 2.3.1 Design Life .......................................................................................................................10 2.3.2 Operating Pressure...........................................................................................................11 2.3.3 Depth
  • Peas (Swainsona Species)

    Peas (Swainsona Species)

    Action Statement Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 No. 126 Twelve threatened Swainson-peas and Darling- peas (Swainsona species) Description and distribution The genus Swainsona is represented in Victoria by Distribution maps of each species can be found at 18 species, of which all but four are considered to the end of this Action Statement. be threatened in the wild. This Action Statement Habitat addresses 12 threatened (vulnerable or endangered) taxa of Swainsona listed below. Swainsona species are confined to specific Detailed survey and monitoring of all known grassland and woodland habitats found in south- populations was undertaken between September west Victoria, the Mallee, native grasslands of the 1997 and September 1999. The information northern plains, and riverine habitats along the presented in this Action Statement is based on Murray River. results of these surveys which are stored on the Department of Sustainability and Environment Life history and ecology threatened plant population monitoring database, Swainsona species are largely renascent perennials, VROTPop. Of the two remaining threatened resprouting in suitable conditions from a Swainsona species, Swainsona galegifolia already persistent rootstock. This gives individual plants has a published Action Statement, while Swainsona the capacity to persist between years given suitable recta is presumed extinct in Victoria. conditions. Walsh et al. (1996) also comment that Swainsona species are small to medium annuals or Swainsona purpurea can behave as an annual. renascent perennials, with hairy to glabrous, Growth and flowering among most species of pinnate foliage with 3 - 7 linear leaflets, and Swainsona species appears to be stimulated by flowers arranged in racemes (on lateral stalks) available moisture, thus plants are most frequently varying from yellow to red, pink, purple or violet in observable following adequate Spring rainfall.
  • Riparian Vegetation of the River Murray COVER: Healthy Red Gum in the Kex)Ndrook State Forest Near Barham N.S.W

    Riparian Vegetation of the River Murray COVER: Healthy Red Gum in the Kex)Ndrook State Forest Near Barham N.S.W

    Riparian Vegetation of The River Murray COVER: Healthy red gum in the Kex)ndrook State Forest near Barham N.S.W. Background, black box silhouette. PHOTO: D. Eastburn ISBN 1 R75209 02 6 RIVER MURRAY RIPARIAN VEGET ION STUDY PREPARED FOR: MURRAY-DARLING BASIN COMMISSION BY: MARGULES AND PARTNERS PTY LTD PAND J SMITH ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION FORESTS AND LANDS VICTORIA January 1990 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The River Murray Riparian Vegetation Survey was initiated by the Murray­ Darling Basin Commission t9 assessJhe present status ofthe vegetationalong the Murray, to identify causes ofdegradation, and to develop solutions for its rehabilitation and long term stability. The study area was the floodplain of the Murray River and its anabranches, including the Edward-Wakool system, from below Hume Dam to the upper end of Lake Alexandrina. The components of the study were: · Literature Review A comprehensive bibliography was compiled on the floodplain vegeta­ tion, its environment and the impact ofman's activities. The literature was reviewed and summarised. · Floristic Survey A field survey was carried out, visiting 112 sites throughout the study area and collecting vegetation data from 335 plots. Data collected were the species present, their relative abundance, the condition of the eucalypts, the amount ofeucalypt regeneration and indices ofgrazing pressure. Brief studies were made of the effects of river regulation and salinisation at specific sites. Thirty-seven plant communities were identified from a numerical analyis ofthe floristic survey data. The differences reflect environmental changes both along the river and across the floodplain. The most important factors were identified as soil salinity levels and flooding frequency.
  • SDL Offsets in the Lower Murray NSW: Locks 8 and 9 Weir Pool Manipulation Carrs, Capitts and Bunberoo Creeks Connectivity Frenchmans Creek Fish Passage at August 2015

    SDL Offsets in the Lower Murray NSW: Locks 8 and 9 Weir Pool Manipulation Carrs, Capitts and Bunberoo Creeks Connectivity Frenchmans Creek Fish Passage at August 2015

    DISCLAIMER: This is a preliminary business case, used to inform decision-making by the Murray- Darling Basin Ministerial Council and Basin Officials’ Committee on sustainable diversion limit adjustment mechanism projects. The document represents the Business case for SDL offsets in the Lower Murray NSW: Locks 8 and 9 weir pool manipulation Carrs, Capitts and Bunberoo Creeks connectivity Frenchmans Creek fish passage at August 2015. The NSW Department of Industry is currently developing project summary documents that will summarise project details, and will be progressively published on the Department of Industry website. Detailed costings and personal information has been redacted from the original business case to protect privacy and future tenders that will be undertaken to deliver these projects. Business case for SDL offsets in the Lower Murray NSW: Locks 8 and 9 weir pool manipulation Carrs, Capitts and Bunberoo Creeks connectivity Frenchmans Creek fish passage Final business case August 2015 Document review and authorisation Doc. Final/Draft Date Authors Reviewed by Quality check Release approved Issued to Copies Version by 1.0 Draft 30/03/15 1e 2.0 Draft 9/04/15 1e - for distribution to SC members 3.0 Final draft 17/04/15 1e 4.0 Final draft v2 4/06/15 1e Notes: * Ecological Associates ** Alluvium Published by the NSW Department of Primary Industries, DPI Water Business case for SDL offsets in the Lower Murray NSW: Locks 8 and 9 weir pool manipulation. Carrs, Capitts and Bunberoo Creeks connectivity. Frenchmans Creek fish passage. First published August 2015 ISBN number – get this by filling in a request to More information www.dpi.nsw.gov.au Acknowledgments This report has been prepared by RMCG, Alluvium and Ecological Associates.
  • Flora-Lab-Manual.Pdf

    Flora-Lab-Manual.Pdf

    LabLab MManualanual ttoo tthehe Jane Mygatt Juliana Medeiros Flora of New Mexico Lab Manual to the Flora of New Mexico Jane Mygatt Juliana Medeiros University of New Mexico Herbarium Museum of Southwestern Biology MSC03 2020 1 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM, USA 87131-0001 October 2009 Contents page Introduction VI Acknowledgments VI Seed Plant Phylogeny 1 Timeline for the Evolution of Seed Plants 2 Non-fl owering Seed Plants 3 Order Gnetales Ephedraceae 4 Order (ungrouped) The Conifers Cupressaceae 5 Pinaceae 8 Field Trips 13 Sandia Crest 14 Las Huertas Canyon 20 Sevilleta 24 West Mesa 30 Rio Grande Bosque 34 Flowering Seed Plants- The Monocots 40 Order Alistmatales Lemnaceae 41 Order Asparagales Iridaceae 42 Orchidaceae 43 Order Commelinales Commelinaceae 45 Order Liliales Liliaceae 46 Order Poales Cyperaceae 47 Juncaceae 49 Poaceae 50 Typhaceae 53 Flowering Seed Plants- The Eudicots 54 Order (ungrouped) Nymphaeaceae 55 Order Proteales Platanaceae 56 Order Ranunculales Berberidaceae 57 Papaveraceae 58 Ranunculaceae 59 III page Core Eudicots 61 Saxifragales Crassulaceae 62 Saxifragaceae 63 Rosids Order Zygophyllales Zygophyllaceae 64 Rosid I Order Cucurbitales Cucurbitaceae 65 Order Fabales Fabaceae 66 Order Fagales Betulaceae 69 Fagaceae 70 Juglandaceae 71 Order Malpighiales Euphorbiaceae 72 Linaceae 73 Salicaceae 74 Violaceae 75 Order Rosales Elaeagnaceae 76 Rosaceae 77 Ulmaceae 81 Rosid II Order Brassicales Brassicaceae 82 Capparaceae 84 Order Geraniales Geraniaceae 85 Order Malvales Malvaceae 86 Order Myrtales Onagraceae
  • Ecology of the Ecological Community

    Ecology of the Ecological Community

    APPENDIX A: BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY OF THE ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY This appendix provides further relevant information about the biology and ecology of the KI Narrow-leaved Mallee Woodland ecological community to better understand what the ecological community is and how it functions. Biology of key species The dominant presence of Eucalyptus cneorifolia in the tree canopy is a diagnostic feature of the ecological community. The KI narrow-leaved mallee is an upright tree, to ten metres tall, sometimes with a single stem or in the form of a multi-stemmed mallee (Brooker et al., 2002). It generally forms a dense canopy of narrow, dark green leaves. The leaves have conspicuous oil glands and the species was used for the Eucalyptus oil industry (Willoughby et al., 2001). The KI narrow-leaved mallee develops a lignotuber at the base of the trunk. Regeneration after disturbances, such as fire, occurs mostly through resprouts from the lignotuber. Regeneration from canopy-stored seed or from the soil seed bank is thought to be limited (Rawson et al., 2012). Other plant species may be widespread throughout the ecological community, for instance Melaleuca uncinata (broombrush), M. lanceolata (dryland tea-tree) or Thryptomene ericaea (heath thryptomene) are common at many sites. However, no other plant species occurs across all sites nor has such an obvious presence that it governs the structure and appearance of the ecological community. Similar considerations apply to the faunal component of the ecological community. The upper height limit for mallee eucalypts is typically about 9 metres (Parsons, 1994). An unusual feature of mallees on KI is that they can be taller, sometimes exceptionally so.
  • Red River Gum CAP Jan 2020

    Red River Gum CAP Jan 2020

    Conservation Action Plan for River Red Gum parks and reserves managed by Parks Victoria December 2019 Authorised and published by Parks Victoria Level 10, 535 Bourke Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 Copyright © 2019 Parks Victoria. ISBN: 978-0-6483776-0-3 (paperback) For further information Phone: 13 1963 Copies may be downloaded from the Parks Victoria website www.parkweb.vic.gov.au Conservation Action Plan for River Red Gum parks and reserves managed by Parks Victoria December 2019 Disclaimer This plan is prepared without prejudice to any negotiated or litigated outcome of any native title determination applications covering land or waters within the plan’s area. It is acknowledged that any future outcomes of native title determination applications may necessitate amendment of this plan; and the implementation of this plan may require further notifications under the procedures in Division 3 of Part 2 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth). The plan is also prepared without prejudice to any future negotiated outcomes between the Government/s and Traditional Owner Communities. It is acknowledged that such negotiated outcomes may necessitate amendment of this plan. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information in this plan is accurate. Parks Victoria does not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence that may arise from you relying on any information in the publication. Acknowledgements Participants in the River Red Gum Park Landscape Conservation Action Planning process are thanked for their technical input and sharing their local knowledge. Iterations The first iteration of this plan was approved by Parks Victoria in December 2019.
  • Plants Poisonous to Horses an Australian Field Guide

    Plants Poisonous to Horses an Australian Field Guide

    Plants Poisonous to Horses An Australian Field Guide HOR - 06-048 Plants Poisonous to1 1 2/06/2006 9:25:44 AM xxxxx HOR - 06-048 Plants Poisonous to2 2 2/06/2006 9:25:44 AM Plants Poisonous to Horses An Australian Field Guide Mellisa Offord RIRDC Publication No 06/048 RIRDC Project No. OFF-1A HOR - 06-048 Plants Poisonous to1 1 2/06/2006 9:25:45 AM Disclaimer by RIRDC Disclaimer by author The information contained in this publication is intended for The information presented in this publication are intended as a general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to guide to the plants in Australia that are poisonous to horses. All help improve the development of sustainable industries. The care and diligence has been exercised in interpreting published information should not be relied upon for the purpose of a information as the basis for the information presented in this particular matter. Specialist and/or appropriate legal advice book. should be obtained before any action or decision is taken on Specific circumstances and research findings after the date of the basis of any material in this document. The Commonwealth publication may influence the accuracy of the infomation within of Australia, Rural Industries Research and Development this book. The author accepts no responsibility and disclaims Corporation, the authors or contributors do not assume liability any liability for any error, loss or unforeseen consequence that of any kind whatsoever resulting from any person’s use or may arise from relying on, or adopting, any of the information in reliance upon the content of this document.
  • Species List

    Species List

    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
  • Encampment. Here Likewise Grew a Shrubby Species of Xerotes 110H

    Encampment. Here Likewise Grew a Shrubby Species of Xerotes 110H

    - 113 - encampment. Here likewise grew a shrubby species of Xerotes 110h hard rush-like leaves, but allied to X.gracilis.4 Mitchell sketched his quandong-like shrub, naming it Ellsalzarr1-.TsAyana. This plant was long known as Fusanusarsicarius, but in recent revisions, Mitchell t s name has been restored, so that the Quandong is now Eualya acuminata and the Bitter Quandong is E.murrayana. Mitchell thus became -the first explorer, apart from Cunningham, a professional botanist, to name and publish, albeit without the traditional Latin description, a native plant. Also on the Murray, he found a very beautiful, new, shrubby species of cassia, with thin papery pods and...the most brillant yellow blossoms...I would name it C.heteroloba.464 Lindley accepted this, and the plant was so named, although it proved to be synonymous with Cassia eremophila which had precedence. Similarly, Mitchell named Pelargonium rodne anum, which would be an acquisition to our gardens. I named it...in honour of Mrs. Riddell Sydney, grand-daughter of the famous Rodney.4-} On this expedition, Mitchell made his usual prophecies concerning the economy of the new country. He felt that the "quandong nut" and "gum 466 acacia may in time, become articles of commerce" and "having brought home specimens of most of the woods of the interior", Mitchell felt that several of the acacias would be valuable for ornamental work, having a pleasing perfume resembling that of a rose. Some are of a dark colour of various shades, and very compact; others light coloured and resembling in texture, box or lancewood...Specimens of these A pods may be seen at Hallets, No.