M-L I was very upset today to read in our local paper of a family of four tawnies that lived locally until some chainsaw mad fool chopped their home down . they were seen a day later in a nearby Poinciana tree and then there were two seen as road kill the next day. Buderim is supposed to be a green leafy and eco sensitive suburb...... and much of the destruction is being done in the name of conservation with camphor laurels etc. There is a lot of controversy about it locally.
Oh birdie, that is so upsetting!! People should have to pay for this, made to work for the community, helping to plant trees etc. It's a disgrace beyond words.
It is a fairly contentious issue locally at the moment lately , there is a campaign to remove mature trees such as the camphor laurels Woko, and the council is definitely getting a hammering fromn those who care abotu he consequences to the wildlife and he area in general, given that it would take something like 70 years to replace the canopy that they provide.
The lady did provide a beautiful pic of the 4 Tawnies , and the trees removed were in a riparian section of land at martins Creek which the council is planning to "beautify " so that they can make it into a sanitised viewing area. They are removing mature trees so as to build a platform and put in seating , then they will plant new trees and bushes ...no shade will be there ! They are spending $250,000 to beautify an already naturally beautiful area!! SO yes the local paper is full of letters but only one so far that has made the connection with the disappearance of the tawny family.
I understand the camphor laurel is an exotic, invasive species so I guess there's an argument for replacing them with indigenous species or, at least, non-invasive species but perhaps it needs to be done gradually? It seems a shame to suddenly eradicate all shade in an area. Is council removing mature indigenous species? Now that would a crime against the universe!
Your council isn't the only one to spend large sums on re-beautifying areas. Adelaide City Council has spent what must be millions on doing this to North Tce for a reduction in amenity & no habitat benefit that I can see. And I suspect they're about to do likewise to Victoria Square. Interesting times in which we live.
Councils? A guy down the end of my street did convince the council to cut 5 huge gum trees down for him on his property a few days ago. He told them they could fall on his house or the powerlines and start a fire. Not only did they give a permit to cut them down, they did it for him. Later he told my husband, he was getting sick of the sugar gliders living in those trees, because he had to clean up the mess every day, because they ripped the bark off. No point complaining to the council, they gave the permit.
It saddens me that life, in any and all its forms, is treated so badly these days. I spoke to a council worker about some trees that were being torn down. He laughed and said "that's progress". I told him, that isn't progress, that's destruction. I guess I'm an oddity around here. I've kept my "dangerous" trees here for over 30 years, and the first tawny frogmouth I saw eventually died - of old age! His progeny still flit about at night, but their few remaining trees are slowly but surely being destroyed.
Woko ,Karen and M-L .... I know you are all interested in this type of thing. While researching what is going on I have come across a PDF link to the planning of the whole thing by the consultants hired to organise it. It is a 38 page document and full of "dangerous weed canopy"and "public protection" type phrases. I will post it in a separate section and if you are at all interested you can plough through it as i am doing. It all seems to be in the name of integrity of the area and so much talk of public safety ... I am wondering if it is just litigation that the council are worried about . I have just skimmed through it adn no doubt there are areas of fact in it.
It is sad Karen, where I live, after the Black Saturday fires, and the findings of the RC, people are cutting , slashing and burning regardless of anything. My husband and I walk past their properties sometimes thinking nasty thoughts, like : hope their cleaned of everything property burns down first. Nasty me?? The fact is, fire doesn't work like that, if you look at what did, and what didn't burn in the last big fires, houses with no vegetation anywhere near burned down, and others with lots of vegetation around, didn't.
Nature and the animals always have to pay the price.
Birdie, can you just post the link to the file? A document so large will take up a huge space, and attract only very few willing to plough through it. With the link we can go straight to it ourselves if interested. I know people need a place to live, but developers aren't working for those people, they only have their own interests at heart, as do the councils whose pockets they line. And so much of our land now is being sold to overseas companies who have absolutely no concern about our wildlife, nor even our people.
M-L, the huge influx of immigrants both from overseas and southern states here gave councils the excuse they needed to destroy huge, ancient tracts of bushlands. You have heard me mention Berrinba Wetlands. The acres and acres of bush destroyed in that area was horrific, but they added a park to the wetlands and a few walks to pacify the nature lovers. What they did for the wetlands is great, but many koalas and other animals died for it. Much of that land is sold or up for sale for commercial development (so much for housing for the masses moving to Logan). Houses like my own are on 32 perch blocks, big enough to build large blocks of units on. Luckily money is short otherwise I'd be on the street and "my" precious trees gone by now.
even if money is short, Karen, ......unfortunately we are never going to be short of idiots. (sorry, my personal opinion, you'll have to make up your own mind)
This is an area I'm a bit interested in too, as I am looking into this topic for an essay for one of my uni subjects.
The topic is on weed removal and habitat restoration, looking at issues of removing weeds prior to/with/without doing habitat restoration.
Obviously one of these issues is what habitat is provided by exotic weed species, as well as whether regeneration would work as a gradual process with the exotic species left in place. I guess it would also cost less to just remove and regenerate in one go, but that obviously was not the best outconme for the Tawnies in this case.
Hi Tim, you might like to have a look at what birdie has put up under" General/ Article for Woko", that might give you food for thought. Interesting read!
Don't get me started on councils, 23 species I lost in one foul swoop over my back fence and all because I made a phone call to council to see if I could get some trees planted.....their response......send in a grader and slasher and level the entire area in one hit. You would think that when you have well established trees that have been there for years someone would have the brains to do an enviromental impact study to ascertain what "Native" animals might have established themselves there wouldn't you, after all, it is humans that have destroyed all the native scrubland and forced the Frogmouths to seek refuge in places like established Camphor Laurels. In the case of our council I offered them a list of species dates observed etc all recorded over a 12 mth period and not one of them was interested. Its not interesting times we live in, its sad times we live in !!!!
Tim, I'm no academic, but to me it seems that if the Tawnies were so badly affected in this one incidence, how many other creatures less obvious were affected also? Often, the biggest case for keeping a stretch of bushland intact is that koalas are in residence. Upsetting the environment or tearing it down affects a lot more than just the one species though. There is a stretch of road, Mt. Cotton Road, Mt. Cotton, and Valley Way Mt. Cotton, Qld., where so much development has gone on, bush destroyed, animals left homeless and the daily road kill is shocking. Every day I used to travel along those roads, and see dead wallabies, koalas, possums, echidnas, even snakes and birds. The council must clean up daily as I never see many complaints and the same animals are usually gone next day. Hide the evidence huh! I do see the odd non native plant that has sprung up along the side of the road, but could hardly say it has invaded the bush.
Maybe too many environmental studies are done that are too one sided, or too focused on one thing to the detriment of everything else. But I'm out of my depth here, not knowing much about that side of things.
M-L, yes, I've encountered more than a few idiots in my time. Unfortunately they all seem to have more power than I do.
Tassie, it is indeed sad, what is happening to our country. Voting these days is just a farce as they all answer to the same god (the dollar). The people have no value anymore, so what chance the environment?
I posted the link to the consultants pages under general so that any interested parties might find it. It does discuss the likelihood of Koala populations etc. You never know if you can trust these sort of studies I guess but there is a good argument for not proceeding with all this stuff too .
I'll post it again here if you like I just thought that maybe it should be under a heading of its own.
Journalists are inclined to do that sort of thing, birdie. I'll take a gander at the consultant's report when I have a little more time.
Araminta, it's interesting that council gave permission for your neighbour to buy/build a house where it would be endangered by falling limbs. That happens in the Mt Barker Council area. Developers are allowed to build houses right next to 200 year old river red gums. Then it's the tree's fault if a limb falls on the house!
As for bushfire risk, I've noticed here that if we get a few millimetres of rain, the native grasses, especially the kangaroo grass develop a healthy green flush thereby becoming fire retardents. Perhaps if people in bushfire-prone areas planted native grasses & watered them occasionally in dry spells there'd be less bushfires. It's always been my contention that one of the main causes of bushfires is the exotic annual grasses which provide a very heavy, dry fuel load.
It amazes me that so many people come to the Mt Lofty Ranges to enjoy the natural lifestyle & then proceed to rip it all down. And the frequent burning off is the signal that it's OK to do this. Meanwhile, exotic annual grasses are encouraged to flourish. And it also amazes me that the authorities allow housing developments in bushfire prone areas. Again, it's the fault of the natural environment when lives & properties are destroyed. This is quite a pathalogical situation we have here.
Timmo, there are a lot of factors at work in deciding whether to leave exotics in place & to allow natural regeneration to occur. One of the prime factors is rainfall. So many weeds, being from Europe's higher rainfall areas, are advantaged in Australia's higher rainfall areas. This means they successfully compete with native species & prevent their regeneration. In such a situation I believe there's a strong case for weed removal but this needs to be done close to any native bushland or grassland to enable regeneration into the previously weedy areas.
This leads to the 2nd factor: what native bushland/grassland exists near the weedy area? A principle of the Bradley method of bush regeneration is to work from the highest quality bushland outwards, allowing the seed from the bushland to fall or be transported into the cleared areas.
A 3rd factor is the perniciousness of the weeds. On my property the highly pernicious weed Cock's foot almost totally covered the block. It has disappeared in many places due to competition for water, nutrients & light by the trees & shrubs I've planted. I suspect toxins in the tree bark has also disadvantaged the Cock's foot, oats & other weeds. Now, after 25 years, relatively large areas of Cocks' foot are disappearing under assault from native grasses, mainly kangaroo grass Themeda triandra but I'm not sure why. I have heard that Cock's foot pasture tends to deteriorate after about 20 years (so therein lies another factor, perhaps). I give the kangaroo grass a helping hand by spraying out from the edges of stands but in some places the kangaroo grass has needed no help at all which suggests the regeneration capability of the kangaroo grass might be a 5th factor.
There is a strong argument, I believe, for spending a couple of years observing weedy areas before controlling weeds. This allows any native seed in the soil to generate without interference from grazing or other activities. It also allows any transported seed communities to build up & germinate if there is native bushland nearby. Given the above Bradley bush regeneration principle it will also help determine starting locations for weed control.
If there is no nearby bushland then weed control & revegetation can proceed but only after checking the area thoroughly for any remnant native plants.
Where weeds are providing habitat for native wildlife the principle of destroying the weeds after natural habitat has been restored nearby applies.
Thanks Woko, what a thorough and comprehensive reply!
Some of that information was my understanding too, but there's definitely some new thoughts that I hadn't yet considered, such as the rainfall issue and the specific perniciousness of the weeds (presumably that equates to "what is the cost/impact if I don't control them now?").
Some other points with respect to rainforest (my end of the country more than yours perhaps :)) are that weedy trees/shrubs can also close off the rainforest edges and maintain the integrity of the ecosystem, where if they are removed, other weeds and more light can get to the understorey, changing the qualities of the rainforest.
I have vaguely similar kinds of issues just in my garden, like I want to remove an annoying exotic Duranta species, but it is currently providing good shade for all the native ferns, palms and cordylines underneath, so I need to plant something under it that will grow up and provide shade.
Hi Timmo. Yes, I guess weed perniciousness does relate, even equate, to "what is the cost/impact if I don't control them now?". I hadn't thought of it quite like that but I think you're right. I'd seen it more about ability to regenerate & out-compete native species. Thanks for your perspective.
I was interested to learn of the weedy trees/shrubs closing off the rainforest edges. That's something I'd never been aware of. Gosh, it shows how important it is to observe what's going on before intervening with what we might think it best.
Wonderful series Marie-Louise. I havent seen one in ages..... I guess you have to go outside for that ;-)
Not sure that I like that system of titling, as sometimes when you hover with the mouse nothing comes up
Cheers
Ad
Sunshine Coast Queensland
Love the one with the wide gape. I haven't seen any for ages either - outside or on the forum. A pair used to sometimes stop in our yard at dusk
They're great characters and you've captured the essence well. :-)
Good on you Araminta......Nice shots.
M-L I was very upset today to read in our local paper of a family of four tawnies that lived locally until some chainsaw mad fool chopped their home down . they were seen a day later in a nearby Poinciana tree and then there were two seen as road kill the next day. Buderim is supposed to be a green leafy and eco sensitive suburb...... and much of the destruction is being done in the name of conservation with camphor laurels etc. There is a lot of controversy about it locally.
Sunshine Coast Queensland
Oh birdie, that is so upsetting!! People should have to pay for this, made to work for the community, helping to plant trees etc. It's a disgrace beyond words.
M-L
Were there many letters to the editor about the tawny frogmouth evictions & murders, birdie?
It is a fairly contentious issue locally at the moment lately , there is a campaign to remove mature trees such as the camphor laurels Woko, and the council is definitely getting a hammering fromn those who care abotu he consequences to the wildlife and he area in general, given that it would take something like 70 years to replace the canopy that they provide.
The lady did provide a beautiful pic of the 4 Tawnies , and the trees removed were in a riparian section of land at martins Creek which the council is planning to "beautify " so that they can make it into a sanitised viewing area. They are removing mature trees so as to build a platform and put in seating , then they will plant new trees and bushes ...no shade will be there ! They are spending $250,000 to beautify an already naturally beautiful area!! SO yes the local paper is full of letters but only one so far that has made the connection with the disappearance of the tawny family.
Sunshine Coast Queensland
I understand the camphor laurel is an exotic, invasive species so I guess there's an argument for replacing them with indigenous species or, at least, non-invasive species but perhaps it needs to be done gradually? It seems a shame to suddenly eradicate all shade in an area. Is council removing mature indigenous species? Now that would a crime against the universe!
Your council isn't the only one to spend large sums on re-beautifying areas. Adelaide City Council has spent what must be millions on doing this to North Tce for a reduction in amenity & no habitat benefit that I can see. And I suspect they're about to do likewise to Victoria Square. Interesting times in which we live.
Councils? A guy down the end of my street did convince the council to cut 5 huge gum trees down for him on his property a few days ago. He told them they could fall on his house or the powerlines and start a fire. Not only did they give a permit to cut them down, they did it for him. Later he told my husband, he was getting sick of the sugar gliders living in those trees, because he had to clean up the mess every day, because they ripped the bark off. No point complaining to the council, they gave the permit.
M-L
It saddens me that life, in any and all its forms, is treated so badly these days. I spoke to a council worker about some trees that were being torn down. He laughed and said "that's progress". I told him, that isn't progress, that's destruction. I guess I'm an oddity around here. I've kept my "dangerous" trees here for over 30 years, and the first tawny frogmouth I saw eventually died - of old age! His progeny still flit about at night, but their few remaining trees are slowly but surely being destroyed.
Karen
Brisbane southside.
Woko ,Karen and M-L .... I know you are all interested in this type of thing. While researching what is going on I have come across a PDF link to the planning of the whole thing by the consultants hired to organise it. It is a 38 page document and full of "dangerous weed canopy"and "public protection" type phrases. I will post it in a separate section and if you are at all interested you can plough through it as i am doing. It all seems to be in the name of integrity of the area and so much talk of public safety ... I am wondering if it is just litigation that the council are worried about . I have just skimmed through it adn no doubt there are areas of fact in it.
Sunshine Coast Queensland
It is sad Karen, where I live, after the Black Saturday fires, and the findings of the RC, people are cutting , slashing and burning regardless of anything. My husband and I walk past their properties sometimes thinking nasty thoughts, like : hope their cleaned of everything property burns down first. Nasty me?? The fact is, fire doesn't work like that, if you look at what did, and what didn't burn in the last big fires, houses with no vegetation anywhere near burned down, and others with lots of vegetation around, didn't.
Nature and the animals always have to pay the price.
M-L
Birdie, can you just post the link to the file? A document so large will take up a huge space, and attract only very few willing to plough through it. With the link we can go straight to it ourselves if interested. I know people need a place to live, but developers aren't working for those people, they only have their own interests at heart, as do the councils whose pockets they line. And so much of our land now is being sold to overseas companies who have absolutely no concern about our wildlife, nor even our people.
M-L, the huge influx of immigrants both from overseas and southern states here gave councils the excuse they needed to destroy huge, ancient tracts of bushlands. You have heard me mention Berrinba Wetlands. The acres and acres of bush destroyed in that area was horrific, but they added a park to the wetlands and a few walks to pacify the nature lovers. What they did for the wetlands is great, but many koalas and other animals died for it. Much of that land is sold or up for sale for commercial development (so much for housing for the masses moving to Logan). Houses like my own are on 32 perch blocks, big enough to build large blocks of units on. Luckily money is short otherwise I'd be on the street and "my" precious trees gone by now.
Karen
Brisbane southside.
even if money is short, Karen, ......unfortunately we are never going to be short of idiots. (sorry, my personal opinion, you'll have to make up your own mind)
M-L
Hi folks,
Great discussion.
This is an area I'm a bit interested in too, as I am looking into this topic for an essay for one of my uni subjects.
The topic is on weed removal and habitat restoration, looking at issues of removing weeds prior to/with/without doing habitat restoration.
Obviously one of these issues is what habitat is provided by exotic weed species, as well as whether regeneration would work as a gradual process with the exotic species left in place. I guess it would also cost less to just remove and regenerate in one go, but that obviously was not the best outconme for the Tawnies in this case.
Cheers
Tim
Brisbane
Hi Tim, you might like to have a look at what birdie has put up under" General/ Article for Woko", that might give you food for thought. Interesting read!
M-L
Don't get me started on councils, 23 species I lost in one foul swoop over my back fence and all because I made a phone call to council to see if I could get some trees planted.....their response......send in a grader and slasher and level the entire area in one hit.
You would think that when you have well established trees that have been there for years someone would have the brains to do an enviromental impact study to ascertain what "Native" animals might have established themselves there wouldn't you, after all, it is humans that have destroyed all the native scrubland and forced the Frogmouths to seek refuge in places like established Camphor Laurels.
In the case of our council I offered them a list of species dates observed etc all recorded over a 12 mth period and not one of them was interested.
Its not interesting times we live in, its sad times we live in !!!!
Tim, I'm no academic, but to me it seems that if the Tawnies were so badly affected in this one incidence, how many other creatures less obvious were affected also? Often, the biggest case for keeping a stretch of bushland intact is that koalas are in residence. Upsetting the environment or tearing it down affects a lot more than just the one species though. There is a stretch of road, Mt. Cotton Road, Mt. Cotton, and Valley Way Mt. Cotton, Qld., where so much development has gone on, bush destroyed, animals left homeless and the daily road kill is shocking. Every day I used to travel along those roads, and see dead wallabies, koalas, possums, echidnas, even snakes and birds. The council must clean up daily as I never see many complaints and the same animals are usually gone next day. Hide the evidence huh! I do see the odd non native plant that has sprung up along the side of the road, but could hardly say it has invaded the bush.
Maybe too many environmental studies are done that are too one sided, or too focused on one thing to the detriment of everything else. But I'm out of my depth here, not knowing much about that side of things.
M-L, yes, I've encountered more than a few idiots in my time. Unfortunately they all seem to have more power than I do.
Tassie, it is indeed sad, what is happening to our country. Voting these days is just a farce as they all answer to the same god (the dollar). The people have no value anymore, so what chance the environment?
Karen
Brisbane southside.
I posted the link to the consultants pages under general so that any interested parties might find it. It does discuss the likelihood of Koala populations etc. You never know if you can trust these sort of studies I guess but there is a good argument for not proceeding with all this stuff too .
I'll post it again here if you like I just thought that maybe it should be under a heading of its own.
Sunshine Coast Queensland
http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/addfiles/documents/projects/Martins_Ck_Rehab_Plan.pdf
Oh Woko , by the way...to add insult to injury the journalist gave the story a subheading of "Owl family missing"
Sunshine Coast Queensland
Journalists are inclined to do that sort of thing, birdie. I'll take a gander at the consultant's report when I have a little more time.
Araminta, it's interesting that council gave permission for your neighbour to buy/build a house where it would be endangered by falling limbs. That happens in the Mt Barker Council area. Developers are allowed to build houses right next to 200 year old river red gums. Then it's the tree's fault if a limb falls on the house!
As for bushfire risk, I've noticed here that if we get a few millimetres of rain, the native grasses, especially the kangaroo grass develop a healthy green flush thereby becoming fire retardents. Perhaps if people in bushfire-prone areas planted native grasses & watered them occasionally in dry spells there'd be less bushfires. It's always been my contention that one of the main causes of bushfires is the exotic annual grasses which provide a very heavy, dry fuel load.
It amazes me that so many people come to the Mt Lofty Ranges to enjoy the natural lifestyle & then proceed to rip it all down. And the frequent burning off is the signal that it's OK to do this. Meanwhile, exotic annual grasses are encouraged to flourish. And it also amazes me that the authorities allow housing developments in bushfire prone areas. Again, it's the fault of the natural environment when lives & properties are destroyed. This is quite a pathalogical situation we have here.
Timmo, there are a lot of factors at work in deciding whether to leave exotics in place & to allow natural regeneration to occur. One of the prime factors is rainfall. So many weeds, being from Europe's higher rainfall areas, are advantaged in Australia's higher rainfall areas. This means they successfully compete with native species & prevent their regeneration. In such a situation I believe there's a strong case for weed removal but this needs to be done close to any native bushland or grassland to enable regeneration into the previously weedy areas.
This leads to the 2nd factor: what native bushland/grassland exists near the weedy area? A principle of the Bradley method of bush regeneration is to work from the highest quality bushland outwards, allowing the seed from the bushland to fall or be transported into the cleared areas.
A 3rd factor is the perniciousness of the weeds. On my property the highly pernicious weed Cock's foot almost totally covered the block. It has disappeared in many places due to competition for water, nutrients & light by the trees & shrubs I've planted. I suspect toxins in the tree bark has also disadvantaged the Cock's foot, oats & other weeds. Now, after 25 years, relatively large areas of Cocks' foot are disappearing under assault from native grasses, mainly kangaroo grass Themeda triandra but I'm not sure why. I have heard that Cock's foot pasture tends to deteriorate after about 20 years (so therein lies another factor, perhaps). I give the kangaroo grass a helping hand by spraying out from the edges of stands but in some places the kangaroo grass has needed no help at all which suggests the regeneration capability of the kangaroo grass might be a 5th factor.
There is a strong argument, I believe, for spending a couple of years observing weedy areas before controlling weeds. This allows any native seed in the soil to generate without interference from grazing or other activities. It also allows any transported seed communities to build up & germinate if there is native bushland nearby. Given the above Bradley bush regeneration principle it will also help determine starting locations for weed control.
If there is no nearby bushland then weed control & revegetation can proceed but only after checking the area thoroughly for any remnant native plants.
Where weeds are providing habitat for native wildlife the principle of destroying the weeds after natural habitat has been restored nearby applies.
I'm happy to discuss these thoughts.
Thanks Woko, what a thorough and comprehensive reply!
Some of that information was my understanding too, but there's definitely some new thoughts that I hadn't yet considered, such as the rainfall issue and the specific perniciousness of the weeds (presumably that equates to "what is the cost/impact if I don't control them now?").
Some other points with respect to rainforest (my end of the country more than yours perhaps :)) are that weedy trees/shrubs can also close off the rainforest edges and maintain the integrity of the ecosystem, where if they are removed, other weeds and more light can get to the understorey, changing the qualities of the rainforest.
I have vaguely similar kinds of issues just in my garden, like I want to remove an annoying exotic Duranta species, but it is currently providing good shade for all the native ferns, palms and cordylines underneath, so I need to plant something under it that will grow up and provide shade.
Cheers
Tim
Brisbane
Hi Timmo. Yes, I guess weed perniciousness does relate, even equate, to "what is the cost/impact if I don't control them now?". I hadn't thought of it quite like that but I think you're right. I'd seen it more about ability to regenerate & out-compete native species. Thanks for your perspective.
I was interested to learn of the weedy trees/shrubs closing off the rainforest edges. That's something I'd never been aware of. Gosh, it shows how important it is to observe what's going on before intervening with what we might think it best.