RVC 64

Fens and wet heaths, Nandewar and New England Tablelands

RVC 64

Description: A swamp or heath community that occurs in areas with impeded drainage. Trees are typically absent or may rarely be present in low number around the fringe of the RVC or in slightly drier, raised areas. A well-developed shrub layer is often present in which case it is usually dominated by tea-trees (e.g. Leptospermum polygalifolium ssp. transmontanum and L. gregarium ), Small-fruited Hakea ( Hakea microcarpa ) and a range of other shrubs in the genera Epacris , Melaleuca and Baeckea. In this case the community is often referred to as a wet heath or bog. Often areas within RVC 64 have no shrub layer and are instead characterized by sedges, rushes and grasses in which case they are sometimes referred to as a fen. The most common species in these wetter situations include species of sedge like Carex gaudichaudiana , Tall Sedge ( Carex appressa ), Scirpus polystachyus and moisture-loving grasses like Tussock Grass ( Poa labillardierei) and Blown Grass ( Lachnagrostis filiformis ). Sphagnum Moss ( Sphagnum cristatum ) is often present in the lowest layer where it may form a dense, soft mat.

Keith Vegetation Class: Montane Bogs and Fens

Equivalent Biometric Vegetation Type: This RVC represents one Biometric type - “Carex sedgeland of the slopes and tablelands”.

Distinguishing Features: RVC 64 can be distinguished from most other RVC’s by the virtual absence of trees and the relatively moist soil resulting from impeded drainage. It can be distinguished from RVC 65 by the drier substrate (i.e. semi-permanent water is usually absent) and the presence (in most cases) of shrubs and Sphagnum Moss. It is also similar to RVC 23 which is drier and lacks the well-developed sedge layer.

Condition and Threats: Many examples of this RVC have been drained to improve grazing potential and are now either eliminated or highly degraded. Of the remaining examples, many are in poor condition following grazing/trampling by livestock and feral pigs, and weed invasion. Continuing threats include weed invasion regular burning during dry periods, grazing and feral pigs.

Distribution: Within the Namoi catchment, Fens and wet heaths are restricted to poorly drained areas at higher elevations (usually above 600 m altitude) in the eastern half of the catchment.

Current extent: 1 300 ha Former extent: 1 260 ha Percent cleared: -3% Formally reserved: 147 ha Percent r eserved: 12%

Conservation status: Many areas of RVC 64 have been drained and/or are in poor condition. Of the remaining areas, relatively few are reserved (e.g. in Watsons Creek Nature Reserve) while most other areas are still subject to a number of threatening processes.

EPBC type/status: not listed TSC type/status: ‘Endangered’ under the name of “Montane Peatlands and Swamps of the New England Tableland, NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin, South East Corner, South Eastern Highlands and Australian Alps”. Threatened flora: Threatened fauna: Black -necked Stork, Glandular Frog

Potential Climate Change impacts: Increased temperatures and more variable rainfall would have an adverse affect on this RVC. It is already highly restricted with little connectivity between patches and little opportunity to occupy alternate localities. More frequent fire could also impact by changing species composition of these communities. Invasion by woody native and exotic shrubs could be exacerbated.

Management recommendations: Avoid draining fens and wet heaths and exclude grazing by livestock. Monitor and control occurrences of environmental weeds such as Blackberry and feral animals (especially pigs).

Ecological Benchmarks: 50 x 20m plot 20 x 20 m sub-plot Large tree diameter (cm) - Native species richness (midstorey) 1 Large Callitris diameter (cm) - Native species richness (groundcover) 15 Number of large trees - Transect points Number of large Callitris trees - Native canopy cover (%) - Number of trees with hollows - Native midstorey (shrub) cover (%) 5 Length of coarse woody debris (m) - Native groundcover (%) 50 Native species richness (canopy) - Mosses/lichen cover (%) 15 Native species richness (canopy recruitment) - Organic litter cover (%) 10 Rock/bare ground cover (%) 25